D PATRIC SASIKUMAR Vs. A RUTH SHALINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the husband/appellant challenging the Order dated 26.02.2018 passed in I.A. No. 851 of 2017 in IDOP No. 1839 of 2014 on the file of VII Additional Family Court, Chennai directing him to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month to the respondent and Rs. 10,000/- to the minor daughter towards pendente lite maintenance till the disposal of the IDOP No. 1839 of 2014.

(2.) According to the appellant, he married the respondent on 208.2012 and the marriage was solemnised at Church Marriage Auditorium, Divine Mercy Shrine, Anna Nagar East, Chennai - 600 102 as per Christian rites and customs. Due to the wedlock, a female child was born on 27.09.2013. According to the appellant, from the date of marriage, the respondent portrayed an indifferent attitude towards him and she did not respect the elders in the family. The respondent insisted for setting up a separate home for their stay leaving the parents of the appellant alone. Such a demand made by the respondent was not acceded to by the appellant and there were frequent quarrel emanated out of it. According to the appellant, the respondent went to her parents house for delivery of the child and thereafter, she did not return to the matrimonial home inspite of many demands made by him. In such circumstance, the appellant has filed I.D.O.P. No. 1839 of 2014 under Section 10 (x) (h) of The Divorce Act,

(3.) On notice, the respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit repudiating the averments made in the Original Petition. That apart, the respondent has also filed I.A. No. 851 of 2017 in IDOP No. 1839 of 2014 under Section 41 of The Divorce Act contending inter alia that during the matrimonial life, it was the appellant who subject her to acute matrimonial cruelty and that the appellant did not discharge his matrimonial obligations as a dutiful husband. On 07.07.2013, the respondent left the matrimonial home while she was pregnant. On 26.09.2013, the respondent delivered a female child, who was later christened as P. Kelsy Daphne and the birth of the child was also informed to the appellant and his family members. Though the appellant and his family members came to the hospital to see the respondent and the new born female child, they left within a few minutes without even informing the respondent. After the birth of the child, the appellant did not visit the respondent in her parents house and inspite of many efforts taken by the parents of the respondent, the respondent was not permitted to return to the matrimonial home along with the minor child. According to the respondent, the appellant is employed as a Senior Manager in HDFC Bank, Chennai and earning a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month as salary, however, he has not chosen to maintain the respondent and the minor child. It was also stated that the respondent was not gainfully employed and she is not resourceful enough to maintain herself and the minor daughter. According to the respondent, she is depending upon her parents for even petty expenses for herself and the minor child. Further, the child was studying Pre-Kinder Garden standard in a school for which the parents of the respondent, with great difficulty, are paying the school fees, expenses for books and other allied necessities. In such circumstances, the respondent has filed the interlocutory application praying to direct the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as interim maintenance for herself and the minor child.