Sandeep Agarwal vs Priyanka Agarwal

G.S. Sistani, J

Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 20.12.2016 passed by the Family Court, by which on an application filed by the (wife)/respondent

herein under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, maintenance has been fixed in the following manner:

“(a) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.12,000/- per month w.e.f. 30.10.2009;

(b) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.15,000/- per month from April, 2011;

(c) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.18,000/- per month from April, 2013;

(d) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.20,000/- per month from April, 2014;

(e) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- per month from April, 2015; and

(f) The respondent shall pay an enhanced amount of maintenance @ Rs.30,000/- per month w.e.f. April, 2016.â€​

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Family Court has lost track of the fact that even as per the respondent in terms of the

statement of Income Part-IV, which has been placed on record, her household expenditure is approximately Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per month for

groceries/food/personal care/clothing. It is further submitted that the respondent has factored in medication at Rs.2,000/- per month and litigation and

legal expenses @ Rs.2,000/-per month approximately. Learned counsel submits that no supporting documents have been filed with regard to the

expenditure of medication, neither any document has been filed to show that the litigation and legal expenses were @ Rs.2,000/- per month.

Additionally, counsel for the appellant submits that the income of the appellant is fluctuating in nature which is evident upon the salary slips which have

been placed on record.

Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the present appeal. It is contended that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the

Family Court. It is submitted that the salary slips would show that though the salary of the appellant is fluctuating, but the interim maintenance fixed is

proportionate to the income of the appellant. He further submits that no documents are required in support of the plea raised with regard to the

medication, litigation and legal expenditure as the amounts so referred are on the lower side keeping in view the cost of litigation expenses as of today.

We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and carefully examined the order passed by the Family Court. The Family Court has assessed

the income of the appellant to approximately Rs.1,03,000/- per month. We may note that this is after deduction of Income Tax and deduction of

Provident Fund, which are deducted every month. The salary slips which have been placed on record would show that though the income of the

appellant is fluctuating in nature, but even after the deductions of the salary per month, the income goes up to approximately Rs.1,36,000/- per month

as is evident upon perusing the documents which have been placed on record. The Family Court and in fact, rightly, in our view, assessed the income

of the appellant on the lower side and enhanced the maintenance as is reproduced hereinabove for different periods at different rates.

We find no infirmity in the orders passed by the Family Court, which would require interference. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

The appellant submits that he would pay all the future instalments of amount in terms of the orders so passed by the Family Court.

CM.APPL 13938/2017(stay)

The application also stands dismissed in view of the orders passed in the present appeal.      Â