S. Priya vs K. Satish Kumar

G. Rajasuria, J.—Animadverting upon the order dated 25.07.2008, passed by the learned I Additional Family Court, Chennai, in I.A. No.

2794 of 2007 in O.P. No. 725 of 2005, this civil revision petition is focussed.

Both sides called absent.

The nutshell facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision petition as stood exposited from the records

could be portrayed and parodied thus:

The respondent/husband filed the O.P. No. 725 of 2005 seeking divorce as against his wife, the revision petitioner herein. During the pendency of

the O.P., I.A. No. 2794 of 2007 was filed by the wife u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking maintenance in a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month in

her favour and Rs. 3,000/- in favour of the minor child born to the petitioner and the respondent. The Family Court awarded a sum of Rs. 2,000/-

per month and Rs. 1,000/- per month as interim maintenance payable to the wife and the child by the respondent herein. Being aggrieved by and

dissatisfied with the quantum of interim maintenance awarded, the wife filed the revision petition on various grounds.

The contention of the revision petitioner is that the lower Court awarded meagre interim maintenance in favour of the wife and the child, even

though the husband admittedly is getting a salary of Rs. 17,201/- per month.

A mere perusal of the judgment of the lower Court would demonstrate and exemplify that admittedly the husband is earning a sum of Rs.

17,200/- per month as per his Salary Certificate. Obviously for the purpose of burking the deduction particulars, the husband has not chosen to

obtain from his employer the certificate which would contain the deduction particulars and file it in Court. In such a case, the Family Court should

have drawn adverse inference as against the husband by virtue of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. Even though the husband was capable

of producing the deduction particulars in an authentic manner, he has not chosen to furnish the same. On the other hand, the Family Court simply

based on the counter filed by the husband inferred as though a sum of Rs. 4,526/- per month is being deducted from his salary towards the

personal loan availed by him and that there would be deductions under other captions such as petrol expenses, mobile phone charges etc. Without

any rhyme or reason, the Family Court simply held as though the husband''s take home salary was only Rs. 10,000/-. Legally speaking, the alleged

deduction towards personal loan to a tune of Rs. 4,526/- per month cannot be taken as one to be deducted for computing the financial

wherewithal of the husband to pay interim maintenance to the wife and the child. Even though the lower Court simply held that his take home pay

was Rs. 10,000/- per month, nonetheless, it awarded interim maintenance only to a tune of Rs. 2,000/- per month towards the wife and Rs.

1,000/- towards the child which would constitute not even one third of his alleged take home salary.

It is a common or garden principle that the wife and the child of an individual is entitled to live in commensurate with the status of the person

concerned. Hence in these circumstances, I am of the considered view that his take home salary should have been taken as much more than Rs.

10,000/-.

To keep the wolf from the door and to keep the pot boiling reasonable amount of interim maintenance should be awarded by Family Court. The

needy dependants in matrimonial matters should not be given to understand that awarding interim maintenance is only an eye wash and bare and

sheer namkevasta one. In this factual circumstances, the wife and the child of the respondent/husband is entitled to lead a reasonably comfortable

life. In such a case, the wife would be requiring atleast a sum of Rs. 120/- per day to meet her requirements towards food, shelter and clothing and

an additional sum of Rs. 400/- towards transport, medical expenses etc. As such, the wife would be requiring atleast a sum of Rs. 4,000/- (Rupees

four thousand only) per month towards her maintenance. The child would be requiring atleast a sum of Rs. 60/- per day towards the food, shelter

and clothing and per month it would come to Rs. 1,800/- and the child also would be requiring a sum of Rs. 200/- towards medical and travelling

expenses and as such, without a sum of Rs. 2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) per month, the child cannot lead a reasonably comfortable life.

Accordingly, this civil revision petition is partly allowed and the order of the lower Court is modified as under:

The respondent shall pay a sum of Rs. 4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only) per month in favour of the wife and a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two

thousand only)per month in favour of child as interim maintenance from the date of I.A. No. 2794 of 2007 i.e. on 04.09.2007 divorce petition till

the disposal of the O.P.

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.