SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Archana W/O Vijay Meshram vs Mr. Vijay Dnyaneshwar Meshram on 11 March, 2020

wp912.19+1.odt
1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETN. NO. 912 OF 2019
Smt. Archana W/o Vijaya Meshram -Vs.- Vijay Dnyaneshwar Meshram
AND
WRIT PETN. NO. 6888 OF 2017
Vijay Dnyaneshwar Meshram -Vs.- Smt. Archana W/o Vijaya Meshram
—————————————————————————————————————————–
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders.
or directions and Registrar’s orders.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
Ms Mohini Sharma, counsel for the petitioner-wife.
Mr. H. G. Katekar, counsel for the respondent-husband.

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.

DATE : 11.03.2020

These petitions are filed by the rival parties
challenging order dated 06/07/2017 passed by the Family
Court at Nagpur. By the said order, the Family Court
considered application at Exhibit-11 filed by the wife i.e. the
petitioner in Writ Petition No.912 of 2019 under section 24
of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1951, seeking maintenance
pendente lite in pending divorce petition filed by the
respondent-husband.

2. In order to substantiate her prayer for grant of
interim maintenance at Rs.10,000/- per month, the
petitioner-wife placed on record before the Family Court
that the respondent-husband was serving in the
Maharashtra State Electricity Board and that he was earning
substantial amount of salary, while she was unemployed
and had no source of income.

KHUNTE

::: Uploaded on – 13/03/2020 14/03/2020 00:46:26 :::
wp912.19+1.odt
2/3

3. Before the Family Court, it was brought on record
that the gross salary of the respondent-husband was
₹28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions
being made in the said figure resulting in net payable salary
being reduced drastically. The Family Court took into
consideration the details of the salary of the respondent-
husband placed on record and found that it would be
appropriate to direct him to pay amount of ₹28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions 5,000/- per
month as interim maintenance from the date of the
application.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner-wife that
the application filed on her behalf ought to have been
allowed in its entirety, considering the admitted income of
the respondent-husband. On the other hand, it was
submitted on behalf of the respondent-husband that the
deductions were for loans that were taken by the
respondent-husband for the marriage ceremony and that
since the deductions, resulted in the net payable income
being reduced to a much lower figure, the amount of
₹28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions5,000/- per month granted by the Court below was not
justified. It was further submitted that the respondent-
husband is also required to look after his mother and that
therefore, the impugned order deserves interference.

5. This Court has taken into consideration the reasons
given in the impugned order passed by the Family Court
while directing the payment of Rs.5,000/- per month as
interim maintenance to the petitioner-wife. The undisputed
pay slip on record indicates that the figures taken into
consideration by the Family Court are correct and that the
KHUNTE

::: Uploaded on – 13/03/2020 14/03/2020 00:46:26 :::
wp912.19+1.odt
3/3

gross salary of the respondent-husband is certainly about
₹28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions28,000/- per month. The reasons given by the Family
Court while allowing the application of the petitioner-wife
appeared to be correct and reasonable in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. Even if the permissible
deductions are taken into consideration and the plea of the
respondent-husband is considered that he is required to
take care of his mother, still grant of ₹28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions 5,000/- per month
towards interim maintenance cannot be said to be
erroneous. At the same time, the prayer of the petitioner-
wife for increase in quantum of interim maintenance
beyond the relief granted by the Family Court is also not
made out in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

6. In view of the above, both the writ petitions are
dismissed and the impugned order passed by the Family
Court is confirmed. It appears that the impugned order was
stayed by this Court, subject to the respondent-husband
depositing amounts of ₹28,339/- and that there were huge amount of deductions25,000/- on two occasions. With
the dismissal of the writ petitions, now the respondent-
husband shall pay the arrears to the petitioner-wife in terms
of the impugned order within a period of six weeks from
today after adjusting the amount of Rs.50,000/-, already
paid to the petitioner-wife. In the facts and circumstances of
the present case, the Family Court is directed to expedite
the proceedings in the divorce petition filed by the
respondent-husband.

JUDGE

KHUNTE

::: Uploaded on – 13/03/2020 14/03/2020 00:46:26 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation