Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 263 (MAD)

P. Gnanaraj v. P. Annapoorani

2015-01-20

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

body2015
Judgment 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant. 2. The appellant is the husband and the respondent is the wife. By an order dated 03.09.2012 in I.A. No. 417 of 2011 in I.D.O.P. No. 28 of 2009, the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin ordered interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month, payable by the appellant to the respondent herein., The said order is challenged before this Court. 3. At the time of admission, interim stay was granted on 04.02.2013, on condition that the petitioner/appellant pays a monthly maintenance of Rs.2,500/- to the respondent directly and also deposit the past arrears, if any at the rate of Rs.2,500/- within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of that order. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that the interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- is excessive and the same shall be interfered with. 5. I am not in agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. He has fairly admitted that the appellant is running a medical shop. It is also an admitted fact that the respondent is not employed and earning money. In these circumstances, awarding interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/-, taking into account the prevailing inflation, cannot be faulted. Hence, I do not find any infirmity with the order impugned and this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 6. The I.D.O.P. is of the year 2009. For the past five years, the petition is pending. Hence, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the case in I.D.O.P. No. 48 of 2009 as expeditiously as possible, not later than 9 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the appellant shall pay the interim maintenance including the arrears, if any, at the rate of Rs.5,000/- directly to the respondent herein. If the interim maintenance is not paid, the Trial Court need not take up the matter as directed above. If any amount is lying in deposit as per the interim order of this Court, the respondent wife is permitted to withdraw the same.