Sangeet Lodha, J. - (1.) THESE writ petitions are directed against order Dt. 1.10.13 passed by the Family Court, Sri Ganganagar, whereby an application preferred by applicant -Smt. Manju (wife) u/s. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act of 1955") has been allowed and non -applicant -Ashok Kumar (husband) has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/ - each as the maintenance pendente lite to the applicant -wife and the child and further to pay her the expenses a sum of Rs. 500/ - on each date of hearing. According to the applicant -wife, the amount of interim maintenance awarded by the Family Court is too meagre and not sufficient for her to maintain herself and her child. In these circumstances, she has preferred the writ petition No. 13107/13 seeking enhancement of the amount of maintenance pendente lite.
(2.) ON the other land, the non -applicant -husband has preferred the writ petition No. 13000/13 aggrieved by the maintenance pendente lite awarded by the Family Court in favour of the applicant -wife as aforesaid. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant -wife submitted that the Family Court has seriously erred in awarding a meagre amount of Rs. 5000/ - each as interim maintenance to the applicant -wife and her son Ashutosh. Learned counsel submitted that the non -applicant -husband is an advocate by profession and belongs to a prosperous joint Hindu family having irrigated agriculture land ad measuring 17.353 hectares. It is submitted that the, non -applicant -husband has the professional income a sum of Rs. 25,000/ - per month. That apart, it is submitted that he is also earning the rental income a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - per month from the house let out at Purani Abadi, Sri Ganganagar. Learned counsel submitted that the child Ashutosh is studying at Birla Public School, Pilani and his school expenses are more than Rs. 2 lacs per year. Accordingly, it is submitted that the amount of maintenance awarded by the Family Court is too meagre and therefore, deserves to be enhanced adequately. Learned counsel submitted that the amount of maintenance as determined by the Family Court has not been paid by the non -applicant -husband till this date and therefore, appropriate directions deserve to be issued for the payment of arrears of maintenance as well.
(3.) ON the other hand, the counsel appearing for the non -applicant -husband submitted that the Family Court has failed to consider the documents produced by the non -applicant -husband which show that the applicant -wife is earning a sum of Rs. 7,000/ - per month. Learned counsel submitted that there was no evidence on record to establish that the non -applicant - husband is earning a sum of Rs. 25,000/ - per month as professional income. Learned counsel submitted that the non applicant -husband does not own any agriculture land and therefore, the presumption regarding the agriculture income is ex facie erroneous. Learned counsel submitted that the alleged rental income of the non applicant -husband was also not established by producing any evidence on record. Learned counsel submitted that agriculture land so also the residential house belong to Joint Hindu Family and therefore, the income derive there from could not have been taken into consideration while determining the amount of maintenance pendente lite. Learned counsel submitted that the order impugned passed by the Family Court solely relying upon the affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant -wife is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel submitted that the Family Court has erred in awarding compensation from the date of the application filed on behalf of the applicant -wife ignoring the fact that the matter was pending before the trial Court for mediation since 2008.;