SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt Nirmala Gome vs Hariballabh Gome on 30 July, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1339/2017

Smt. Nirmala Gome W/o Shri Harivallabh Gome D/o Shri
Ramnath Arya B/c Bairwa , R/o House No. 380-B, R.k. Puram,
Ward No. 07, Kota Raj.
—-Petitioner
Versus
Hariballabh Gome D/o Shri Shivram Gome , R/o Village Khatoli,
Tehsil Itawa, Distt. Kota At Present R/o Executive Engineer,
P.h.e.d. Bundi, Distt. Bundi, Rajasthan
—-Respondent

Connected With
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1116/2017
Hari Ballabh S/o Shri Shivram Gome , R/o Village Khatoli, Tehsil
Itawa, District Kota, Raj., At Present Executive Engineer, P.h.e.d.
Bundi, District Bundi, Raj.

—-Petitioner
Versus
Smt. Nirmala Gome W/o Shri Hari Ballabh Gome, D/o Shri
Ramnath Arya B/c Bairwa , R/o House No.380-B, R.k. Puram,
Ward No.7, Kota, Raj.

—-Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nawal Singh Sikarwar in CRLR
1339/2017 and Mr. M.K. Jain in
1116/2017
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nawal Singh Sikarwar in CRLR
1116/2017 and Mr. M.K. Jain in CRLR
1339/2017

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Order

30/07/2018

1. Petitioner Nirmala Gome has preferred the Criminal Revision

Petition No.1339/2017 and petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome has

preferred Criminal Revision Petition No.1116/2017, aggrieved by
(2 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017]

order dated 03.06.2017 passed by Judge, Family Court No.3, Kota

who has awarded Rs.4,000/- per month to petitioner Nirmala

Gome from the date of filing of the application. Petitioner Nirmala

Gome has preferred revision petition for enhancement of the

maintenance amount and petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome has

preferred the revision petition for setting aside the order of

maintenance.

2. It is contended by counsel for petitioner Nirmala Gome, that

respondent Hari Ballabh Gome is Executive Engineer in PHED and

looking to his salary, the maintenance awarded to the petitioner is

meagre. It is also contended that respondent Hari Ballabh Gome

has many properties and petitioner Nirmala Gome has no source

of income. She is an advocate who is having no briefs and is only

contesting her own case.

3. Counsel for petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome in Criminal Revision

Petition No.1116/2017 has contended that his wife Nirmala Gome

filed a case under Section 498-A and 406 of I.P.C. in which

petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome was acquitted. Petitioner Nirmala

Gome moved a petition under the Domestic Violence Act, wherein

Rs.3,000/- was awarded to her as maintenance. Thereafter, she

moved an application for enhancement of maintenance, on ground

of increase in salary by the implementation of Seventh Pay

Commission. She prayed that interim maintenance be enhanced to

Rs.10,000/-. Court allowed the application and enhanced the

interim maintenance to Rs.10,000/- per month from 10.07.2017.

4. It is also contended by counsel for Hari Ballabh Gome that

since Nirmala Gome is receiving Rs.10,000/- per month as interim

maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, there was no
(3 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017]

justification in awarding additional Rs.4,000/-. It is also contended

that a divorce petition was filed by Hari Ballabh Gome on the

ground of cruelty which stands allowed and a divorce decree is

passed in favour of Hari Ballabh Gome by the Family Court on

30.03.2018. The limb of argument is that it is Nirmala Gome who

is harassing Hari Ballabh Gome, the passing of decree of divorce

on the ground of cruelty establishes the said fact. It is also

contended that Hari Ballabh Gome is to look-after her mother and

has to pay the loan and he is under suspension.

5. It is also contended that Nirmala Gome is an advocate who is

also running a beauty parlour. The Court has wrongly rejected the

plea of Hari Ballabh Gome on the ground that an advocate cannot

indulge in other business. It is also argued by counsel for the

petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome that there was no justification of

Court to award maintenance from the date of filing of the

application, reliance in this regard is placed on “Madan Lal Vs.

Smt. Pushpa Devi, 2018 (1) WLC (Raj.) UC Page 666.”

6. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner Nirmala Gome

that there is a loan on the house in which Nirmala Gome is

residing and Hari Ballabh Gome has not repaid the loan and

Nirmala Gome had to arrange funds from her relatives to repay

the loan.

7. I have considered the contentions.

8. Admittedly, petitioner is residing in the house belonging to

Hari Ballabh Gome and her application for enhancement of interim

maintenance in the domestic violence case stands allowed by the

Court below and interim maintenance under the Domestic Violence
(4 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017]

Act has been increased from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per

month.

9. While passing the order dated 10.07.2017, Court has

mentioned that amount of Rs.10,000/- under the Domestic

Violence Act will be in addition to the maintenance given under

Section 125 of Cr.P.C. by the Family Court. Hari Ballabh Gome was

suspended as he has remained in custody and he is now receiving

Rs.54,000/- per month after deduction of State insurance, GPF

and income tax. In addition he has to pay installment of

Rs.16,000/- per month and the net amount which he is receiving

is Rs. 38,000/- per month.

10. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances

of the case, the amount of Rs.4,000/- awarded by the Family

Court as maintenance does not appear to be excessive or meagre.

11. However, the contentions of counsel for Smt. Nirmala Gome

that she is under threat of being dispossessed from the house in

which she is residing, suffice to say that if such situation occurs,

Nirmala Gome would be free to apply before the Domestic

Violence Court as the application for Domestic Violence Act is still

pending. In totality the order passed by the Court below with

regard to enhancing Rs.4,000/-, is upheld, however, grant of

maintenance from the back date deserves to be set-aside as there

is no justification for the same in view of the fact that the dispute

between parties with regard to 498-A and 406 of I.P.C. stands

decided in favour of husband Hari Ballabh Gome and his

application for divorce on the ground of cruelty also stands

decided in his favour.

(5 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017]

12. Accordingly, revision petition filed by the Nirmala Gome is

dismissed and that filed by Hari Ballabh Gome is partly allowed.

The amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month would be

payable from the date of the order of the Court below.

13. A copy of this order be placed in the connected file.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

Amit/28-29

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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