NILAY KANT MISHRA Vs. VIBHA MISHRA
LAWS(PAT)-2007-2-81
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Decided on February 23,2007

Nilay Kant Mishra Appellant
VERSUS
Vibha Mishra Respondents




JUDGEMENT

- (1.)HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.)THE petitioner seeks setting aside of the order dated 22.7.2005 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna in Matrimonial Case No. 127 of 2002, by which the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs. 7000.00 by way of interim maintenance to his wife from the date of filing of the application, i.e., 16.8.2002 and further directed that the petitioner should deposit Rs. 10,000.00 in lump sum towards litigation cost.
The aforesaid matrimonial case was filed by the husband on various grounds. The opposite party, wife of the petitioner, appeared and thereafter filed an application under Sec.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for maintenance pendente lite and also for the cost of litigation claiming Rs. 8,000.00 and Rs. 3,000.00 respectively per month for the same. Although there was some dispute between the parties as to the actual amount of salary that the petitioner was getting, the court below came to the conclusion that the petitioner was getting around Rs. 20,000.00 per month and disbelieved the contention of the petitioner that his wife is earning about Rs. 20,000.00 per month by tuition in Delhi and thereafter awarded Rs. 7,000.00 per month by way of ad interim maintenance from the date of filing of the petition by the wife of the petitioner on 16.8.2002 and further allowed a lump sum amount of Rs. 10,000.00 towards ad interim litigation cost.

(3.)LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted mainly on two aspects of the matter. Firstly, it was stated that the amount of Rs. 7,000.00 awarded to the wife of the petitioner was very much on the higher side considering that it was only at the stage of ad interim maintenance during the pendency of the litigation between the parties and the purpose of Sec.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which is not meant to lead to enrichment of one party at the cost of the other. It is further submitted that the petitioner is maintaining himself and his parents and the order is also contrary to the various decisions of this court and other courts for the award of ad interim maintenance under Sec.24 of the Act.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.