Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 997 (HP)

Parveen Singh Bhatia v. Anita Bhatia

2017-08-31

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2017
JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. The order under challenge in this petition is Annexure P-6 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Shimla (I) in an application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 whereby the respondentwife has been granted a sum of Rs. 25,000/- as maintenance pendente lite and Rs. 15,000/- towards litigation expenses. 2. The petitioner-husband has filed petition Annexure P-1 with a prayer to dissolve his marriage with respondent by way of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The respondent-wife on entering appearance in the Court below has filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of maintenance pendente lite @ Rs. 31,000/- per month and litigation expenses Rs. 40,000/-. Learned trial Judge, on having taken on record the version of the petitioner-husband and taking into consideration the records has, however, granted the maintenance pendente lite @ Rs. 25,000/- per month and the litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 15,000/-. 3. The complaint is that the amount so granted by the Court below is on higher side as the carry home salary of the petitioner-husband is only Rs. 43,575/-. Out of that also, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- i.e. Rs. 6,000/- to respondent-wife and Rs. 2,000/- each to the children is being paid by him to the respondent consequent upon the order Annexure P-3 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No. 4, Shimla in the proceedings instituted against him under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 4. On hearing learned counsel on both sides and on perusal of the record, it would not be improper to conclude that Rs. 25,000/- per month granted as maintenance pendente lite is on higher side. True it is that as per the salary slip annexed to the reply fled on behalf of respondent-wife, the gross salary of the petitioner-husband is Rs. 97,152/- The deductions on account of GPF subscription, payment of LIC installment and income tax etc. is Rs. 54,993/-. However, the fact remains that the carry home salary of the petitioner, as such, is Rs. 42,159/- . 5. As pointed out hereinabove, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month for her maintenance and that of the children is being paid to her by the petitioner. is Rs. 54,993/-. However, the fact remains that the carry home salary of the petitioner, as such, is Rs. 42,159/- . 5. As pointed out hereinabove, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month for her maintenance and that of the children is being paid to her by the petitioner. There is no bar in awarding maintenance under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and for that matter even under the provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. simultaneously, however, it depends upon the paying capacity of the petitioner-husband. Therefore, the respondent-wife has rightly sought the maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses against her husband. However, the maintenance granted is certainly on higher side. At the same time, the present is also not a case where the respondent-wife in view of the maintenance granted to her under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is not entitled to seek maintenance pendente lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In view of the income of the petitioner-husband coupled with his own liabilities i.e. his own maintenance as well as his mother dependent upon him and also the monthly income, the maintenance pendente lite @ Rs. 12,000/- should have been granted in addition to Rs. 6,000/- which the respondent wife is already getting under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Therefore, the order under challenge, to the extent of granting maintenance pendente lite @ Rs. 25,000/- per month, is modified and besides litigation expenses as granted, the petitioner-husband is also directed to pay the maintenance pendente lite to the respondent-wife @ Rs. 12,000/- per month instead of Rs. 25,000/-. The respondent-wife, however, shall be at liberty to seek further maintenance if legally admissible and enhancement of the maintenance already granted, if so advised. The petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.