Gurpreet Singh vs Manjinder Kaur And Ors

This appeal is filed by the appellant assailing the legality of the order dated 22.8.19 passed by the Family Court, Sriganganagar in Civil Miscellaneous Case No.439/18, whereby an application preferred by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short "the Act of 1955") has been allowed and the appellant has been directed to pay maintenance pendente lite a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month each to the respondent and her minor daughter and litigation expenses Rs.1,000/- in lump sum.

The facts relevant are that the appellant filed a petition seeking decree of divorce against the respondent under Section 13 of the Act of 1955. During the pendency of the petition, the respondent preferred an application under Section 24 of the Act of 1955, claiming maintenance a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month and litigation expenses Rs.25,000/- in lump sum.

After due consideration of the material on record and rival submissions, the Family Court determined the amount of maintenance payable a sum of Rs.5,000/- each for the respondent-wife and her minor daughter-Jasangel. Hence, this appeal.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the respondent is earning Rs.60,000/- per month by teaching profession, however, this aspect of the matter has not even been considered by the Family Court. Learned counsel submitted that as per the income tax return of the appellant, his annual income is about Rs.60,000/- and thus, he is not in position to pay any amount to the respondents towards maintenance. It is submitted that there was no evidence brought on record showing that the appellant is earning Rs.5 lacs from business and Rs.15 lacs from agriculture. Drawing the attention of the Court to the income tax return, learned counsel submitted that the total income of the appellant during the assessment year 2018-19 was Rs.57,871/-and thus, the Family Court has erred in awarding maintenance a sum of Rs.10,000/-per month to the respondents.

We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record.

Indisputably, the purpose behind Section 24 of the Act of 1955 is to provide necessary financial assistance to the party to the matrimonial dispute who has no independent income of his own sufficient for her or his support or to bear the expenses of the proceedings. While considering the application for award of interim maintenance, the relevant consideration is the inability of the spouse to maintain himself or herself for want of independent income or inadequacy of the income to maintain at the level of social status of other spouse.

No hard and fast rule can be laid down for determination of the amount of interim maintenance. It is not disputed that the appellant is carrying on whole sale and retail business of inter alia the products of Mother Dairy in the name of Dashmesh Traders, a proprietorship concern. As per the balance sheet of the appellant's concern as on 31.3.18, the appellant has capital in the business concern a sum of Rs.10,73,605.34. The gross profit of the firm during the assessment year 2018-19 is shown to be Rs.4,49,977/-and net profits Rs.57,871/-. That apart, other income is shown as Rs.1,45,217/-. The appellant has claimed depreciation a sum of Rs.54,756/-. The closing stock is shown to be of Rs.32,60,870/-. That apart, VAT refundable is shown as Rs.6,42,328/-. Suffice it to say that though the appellant has disclosed net profit in preceding three assessment year around Rs.60,000/- per annum but apparently, the appellant is earning reasonable income from business and other sources. In this view of the matter, in the considered opinion of this Court, the amount of maintenance Rs.5,000/- each for the respondent and minor child determined by the Family Court in no manner could be considered to be excessive.

For the aforementioned reasons, the order impugned passed by the Family Court does not warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.

The appeal is therefore, dismissed.