Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 4286 (MAD)

C. Sangeetha v. Rengapasiyam

2008-11-20

M.VENUGOPAL

body2008
Judgment :- The petitioner/wife has filed the present civil revision petition as against the order dated 04.03.2008 in I.A.No.37 of 2006 in H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2006 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Mannargudi in ordering a sum of Rs.500/-to be paid by the respondent/husband to the revision petitioner towards maintenance from 01.01.2008 till the date of disposal of the main HMOP. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/wife contends that the respondent/husband is serving as a Secondary Grade Teacher in Panchayat Middle School, Eda Keelayur, Mannarkudi Taluk and this aspect of the matter has not been taken note of by the trial Judge when the meagre sum of Rs.500/- has been awarded and the same is unsustainable in law and the trial Court has committed an error in not taking note of the statement made by the respondent/ husband during cross examination in interim application and therefore, prays for allowing the civil revision petition and to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.37 of 2006. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent/husband submits that the respondent/husband has filed a divorce petition against the petitioner/wife H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2006 on the file of Sub Court, Mannargudi on the ground of adultery and that in the enquiry conducted by officials of the police department, it has been concluded that the petitioner/wife had illicit intimacy with Balamurugan for a long time and finally the charge of misconduct has been proved against the petitioner/wife and that she has been removed from service and that the maintenance application filed by the petitioner/ wife under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore in C.M.P.No.31 of 2006 has been dismissed for non-prosecution and suppressing this fact the petitioner/wife has filed interim application in I.A.No.37 of 2006 in H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2006 in which the trial Court has ordered an interim maintenance of Rs.500/- per month and that the respondent/husband is a Secondary Grade Teacher with a salary of Rs.10,000/- and after deduction, his take home salary is Rs.5,000/-and that since the petitioner/wife has been removed from service for her proved misconduct the respondent/ husband is not bound to pay any maintenance and therefore, prays for dismissing the revision petition. 4. Admittedly, as on date the H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2006 filed by the respondent/husband is pending on the file of Sub Judge, Mannargudi. 4. Admittedly, as on date the H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2006 filed by the respondent/husband is pending on the file of Sub Judge, Mannargudi. The petitioner/wife has not produced any document much less the salary certificate of respondent/husband so as to enable the trial Court to fix a reasonable sum as maintenance. Even in the absence of any salary document, the trial Court has awarded a sum of Rs.500/-per month towards maintenance from 01.01.2008 till the date of disposal of main HMOP petition because the marriage tie between the parties subsists. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent/husband informs this Court that the respondent/husband will pay the amount of maintenance ordered by the trial Court from 01.01.2008 till this date at the rate of Rs.500/-per month and the petitioner/wife counsel also informs this Court that an interlocutory application claiming the maintenance is pending before the trial Court. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the order passed by the trial Court in ordering maintenance of Rs.500/- per month from 01.01.2008 till the disposal of the HMOP need not be interfered with by this Court at this stage sitting in revision and in that view of the matter, the civil revision petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. 7. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. The respondent/husband is hereby directed to pay to the petitioner/wife the arrears of maintenance amount for the period from 01.01.2008 till this date and also continue to pay subsequently at the same rate till the disposal of the main petition within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the amount can be paid by the respondent/husband either to the counsel for the petitioner/wife in the trial Court or to the petitioner/wife directly. In case, if the arrears of maintenance sum is not paid by the respondent/husband then the wife is given the liberty to proceed further for recovery of the same as per law. In case, if the arrears of maintenance sum is not paid by the respondent/husband then the wife is given the liberty to proceed further for recovery of the same as per law. Further, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the main H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2006 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order after providing opportunity to both parties to let in oral and documentary evidence and parties are directed to cooperate with the trial Court for their HMOP proceedings. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.