Sanjay Sharma vs Mrs. Babita

Jaswat Singh, J.—Petitioner-husband has filed the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 5.6.2009 passed by Family Court, Faridabad, whereby the Respondent-wife along with three minor children, on their application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act have been granted maintenance pendente lite to the tune of Rs. 2500/-per month i.e. Rs. 1,000/-to the Respondent wife and Rs. 500/-each for the three children, aged 12, 10 and 8 years.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that maintenance pendente lite granted by the learned Family Court is on higher side without properly assessing the monthly income of the Petitioner. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court has ignored the fact that the Respondent-wife earns Rs. 3,000/-per month from tailoring and stitching work.

After hearing the learned Counsel and perusing the impugned order I find no merit in the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioner. It is not in dispute that the parties were married on 2.6.1996 and three children were born out of their wedlock. The Petitioner husband had filed divorce petition u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

It is also not disputed that applicant-Respondent wife in her application had made specific averments that Petitioner was working as a Sweetmeat Seller(Halwai) besides being in engaged in agricultural work. It was alleged by her that his income from both the occupations was around Rs. 21,000/-per month. Respondent had categorically denied that she had any source of income.

On the other hand the Petitioner husband claimed to be jobless but remained absolutely silent with regard to his occupation.

In these circumstances, in my opinion the learned Family Court has rightly assessed the income of the Petitioner-husband to be in four figures and the maintenance pendente lite granted to the Respondent-wife as well as minor children, by no stretch of imagination can be said to be on higher side, warranting interference by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Dismissed.