1 MP-1568-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MP-1568-2019
(SMT.VANDANA KUMARI SINGH Vs DEEPAK KUMAR)

3
Jabalpur, Dated : 05-08-2019
Smt. Namrata Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri K.K.Dwivedi, learned counsel for the respondent.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner herein being
aggrieved by the order dated 13-02-2019. Vide the said order, the learned
Family Court Singrauli had dismissed the application moved by the petitioner

herein under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage ACt for maintenance pendente lite.

The respondent, who is purportedly, the Branch Manager of
Corporation Bank in Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh had filed a petition for divorce
on 09-08-2016.

The petitioner had moved a transfer petition of the divorce case before
the Supreme Court under Section 25 of C.P.C and the Supreme Court
transferred the case from Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh to Singrauli ( Madhya
Pradesh), where the petitioner resides.

The learned trial court had dismissed the application for maintenance

pendente lite by placing reliance upon the judgement of this Court passed in
Mamta Jaiswal Vs. Rajesh Jaiswal 2000 (3) MPLJ 100. By applying the
said judgment on the facts of the present case, the learned trial court held that
as the petitioner is a M.com, she is capable of working and earning and that
the provision of Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act is to be allowed in cases
of extreme hardship. The learned trial Court has not mentioned or clarified,
how extreme hardship has to be decided in the present case. In Mamta
Jaiswal’s case, the petitioner Mamta Jaiswal was highly qualified lady with
degrees of M.Sc., M.C. and M.Ed. and it was also held in that case, that till
the year 1994, Mamta Jaiswal was working at the Gulamnabi Azad Education
College. It was in such a backdrop of facts, that this court had arrived at a
finding that a person, who was already working with so many degrees, could

Digitally signed by PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Date: 08/08/2019 12:07:56
2 MP-1568-2019
not have remained unemployed for a long and that the petitioner in that case,
could not be rewarded with a bounty of maintenance for deliberately avoiding
to work and earn a living.

The learned trial court prima facie appears to have erred in arriving at
this conclusion based upon the facts of Mamta Jaiswal’s case. It ought to
have appreciated that the petitioner herein, is only a M.Com and in today’s

time, even people with professional degrees in Engineering are finding it
difficult to find a job. The learned trial Court failed to appreciate that the
respondent in this case was unable to show that the petitioner was capable of
getting work and was deliberately avoiding in taking up employment. Prima
facie also, this court is of the opinion that the judgments cannot be applied
across the Board in all cases of similar nature. It must be seen at the
backdrop of the facts and circumstances of each case.

Thereafter, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the
attention of this Court to the additional documents filed by the petitioner
which reveal that during the pendency of the divorce petition, the respondent
herein has contracted a second marriage, the photographs of the said
marriage are also annexed herewith. Pursuant thereto, an FIR has been
registered against the respondent for offences under Sections 498-A, Section494,
Section506 r/w 34 of SectionIPC and under Sections 3/Section4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Though, this a miscellaneous petition, in view of the applications which
has been filed by the petitioner for taking additional documents on record
vide IA No. 7871/19, which for the reasons stated in the application, is
allowed and the documents are taken on record, it would be in the interest of
justice to afford an opportunity of hearing to the respondent to admit or deny
the said documents filed therewith.

Under the circumstances, four weeks’ time is given to the respondent
to file his reply to the additional documents. In the meanwhile, as an interim
measure, the respondent shall forthwith start paying Rs. 10,000/- per month
to the petitioner as interim maintenance during the pendency of this

Digitally signed by PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Date: 08/08/2019 12:07:56
3 MP-1568-2019
petition.

List this case on 14-10-2019 for the reply of the respondent and
final disposal at motion hearing stage.

ATUL SREEDHARAN)
JUDGE

PG

Digitally signed by PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Date: 08/08/2019 12:07:56