Ramesh. R.M. vs Hemalatha. G

B.S. Patil

In this writ petition, petitioner is calling in question the order dated 24.06.2011 passed by the 6th Additional Family Court, Bangalore, in M.C.No.114/2006 granting interim maintenance in a sum of ( Rs. ). 3,000/- to the respondent-wile and ( Rs. ). 1,000/- each to the two children of the petitioner and the respondent.

Matrimonial proceedings are instituted by the respondent-wife seeking a decree of divorce under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on grounds of cruelty and desertion. The respondent is the wife of the petitioner. She has filed an application seeking grant of interim maintenance during the pendency of the matrimonial proceedings. The Court below having considered the respective pleas taken by the parties has come to the conclusion that even though the respondent-wife has sought for award of maintenance at ( Rs. ).5,000/- per month in her favour and a sum of ( Rs. ).8.000/- towards litigation expenses asserting that her husband was earning about ( Rs. ). 18.000/- per month from fabrication business and also from agricultural works, as there was no material produced to show that the petitioner was earning ( Rs. ). 18.000/- per month, keeping in mind the fact that the respondent-wile has to maintain herself, a sum of ( Rs. )3.000/- per month was to be awarded as interim maintenance to the wife and ( Rs. ) 1,000/- each to the two school going children.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the absence of proof of income of the petitioner, the Court below ought not to have awarded a sum of ( Rs. )5,000/- as interim maintenance in favour of the respondent-wife and her children.

This contention cannot be accepted. It has to be seen that the order passed by the Court below is by way of an interim arrangement. To enable the wife and children to sustain themselves, a sum of ( Rs. )3.000/- per month in favour of the wife along with another sum of ( Rs. ) 1,000/- each in favour of the two children Is awarded as interim maintenance, hence the same cannot be termed as excessive. Keeping in mind the hard days and the cost of living coupled with the burden of the respondent to maintain the two children. I do not find that this matter requires Interference in exercise of the writ jurisdiction.

Hence, the writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed.

However, it is unnecessary to observe that the Court below shall dispose of the petition for divorce filed by the respondent as expeditiously as possible.