(202) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CMM No.17 of 2012 and FAO No.M-264 of 2011 Date of decision : 13.1.2014 Sanjiv Vohra ….
Appellant Versus Ritu ….
Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SARON.
HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE NAVITA SINGH.
Present: Mr.O.P.Hoshiarpuri, Advocate for the applicant/respondent-wife.
Mr.K.S.Dadwal, Advocate for the non- applicant/appellant-husband.
*** S.S.Saron, J.
CMM No.17 of 2012 Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for grant of maintenance pendente lite.
The appellant-husband has filed the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 05.9.2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc).Fast Track Court-II, Hoshiarpur in terms of which the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘Act’ – for short) filed by the appellant has been dismissed.
Amit Khanchi 2014.01.20 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CMM No.17 of 2012 and [2].FAO No.M-264 of 2011 Notice in the appeal was issued by this Court on 23.9.2011.
After notice, the respondent-wife has filed the present application on 10.2.2012 for grant of maintenance pendente lite.
It is submitted on behalf of the respondent-wife that in the petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class vide order dated 31.3.2008 directed the appellant-husband to pay Rs.5000/- per month for maintenance and also directed him to make arrangement for accommodation of the respondent-wife and if he was unable to make alternative arrangement of accommodation for the respondent-wife, then he was to pay Rs.2000/- per month in addition to Rs.5000/-.
The order of the learned Magistrate was assailed in this Court by way of criminal misc.
application No.11014-M of 2008 and by order dated 2.5.2008, it was ordered that if the appellant-husband continued to pay Rs.2000/- per month to the respondent-wife, operation of the impugned order dated 31.3.2008 shall remain stayed.
The said amount of Rs.2000/- is admittedly being paid.
The matter was also referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
However, the mediation proceedings remained unsuccessful.
The appellant-husband is stated to be running a chemist shop at Hoshiarpur and also doing dairy farming.
His monthly income is stated to be approximately Rs.45,000/-.
The respondent- wife filed a petition for custody of the minor child and also an application for interim custody.
In the reply (Annexure A1) to the said application, the appellant-husband stated that the respondent- wife was not having any source of income while he was working in a Amit Khanchi chemist shop and also doing business of dairy farming.
It is 2014.01.20 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CMM No.17 of 2012 and [3].FAO No.M-264 of 2011 further stated by the respondent-wife that she is going for regular check-up to Mohan Dai Oswal Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation and her expense for her latest check-up on 20.1.2012 was Rs.1890/-; besides, Rs.534.60 paisa for medicines.
Copy of the expenses incurred is attached as Annexure R2.
The appellant-husband in his reply has submitted that in terms of order dated 2.5.2008 passed by this Court in criminal misc.
No.11014-M of 2008, maintenance of Rs.2000/- per month has been fixed for the respondent-wife.
It is also stated that an amount of Rs.2.00 lacs by bank draft has been paid to the respondent-wife in lieu of dowry articles in terms of order dated 21.3.2009 passed by this Court in CRM No.M-6916 of 2008.
It is denied that income of the appellant-husband is Rs.45,000/- per month.
It is submitted that Rs.2000/- having been fixed by this Court, no further maintenance is liable to be paid.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter.
The marriage between the parties was solemnized at Hoshiarpur according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 2.12.2005.
The parties cohabited and lived together as husband and wife at Hoshiarpur.
They had a son namely Tavish from the marriage.
The appellant-husband on 26.11.2007/2.12.2010 filed a petition seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty.
The petition of the appellant- husband has been dismissed and aggrieved against the same, he has filed the present appeal.
In reply (Annexure R1) filed by the respondent-wife to the application seeking interim custody of the minor, it is stated by Amit Khanchi the appellant-husband that the appellant-husband is paying 2014.01.20 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CMM No.17 of 2012 and [4].FAO No.M-264 of 2011 maintenance to the respondent-wife as she is not able to maintain herself.
Therefore, the respondent-wife, it is stated, is not entitled to the custody of the minor because she is not having any source of income and the appellant-husband is working in a chemist shop and also doing business of dairy farming.
It is not in dispute that in proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in terms of the order dated 31.3.2008 the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class fixed maintenance of Rs.5000/- per month, besides, directed the appellant husband to arrange accommodation for the respondent-wife and in case alternative arrangement of accommodation was not made then the appellant- husband was to pay Rs.2000/- per month in addition to the amount of Rs.5000/- per month to the respondent-wife.
Therefore, Rs.7,000/- per month had been fixed by the Magistrate which has been stayed by this Court in case the appellant-husband pays Rs.2000/- per month.
The amount of Rs.7000/- per month was fixed in the year 2008.
In the facts and circumstances, we feel at present the said amount of Rs.7000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite would be just and expedient.
Accordingly, the application of the respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Act is allowed to the extent that the appellant-husband shall pay the respondent-wife Rs.7000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite which shall be paid from the date of filing the application which was filed on 10.2.2012.
The amount of Rs.2000/- which is already being paid in consequence of the order passed by this Court on 2.5.2008 shall be included in the amount of Rs.7,000/-.
The arrears of the maintenance shall be Amit Khanchi deposited in the account of the respondent-wife within one month 2014.01.20 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh CMM No.17 of 2012 and [5].FAO No.M-264 of 2011 and the maintenance shall continue to be deposited in future for which purpose the learned counsel for the respondent-wife shall furnish the bank account of the respondent-wife to the learned counsel for the appellant.
FAO No.M-264 of 2011 Admitted.
(S.S.SARON) JUDGE (NAVITA SINGH) JUDGE131.2014 amit Amit Khanchi 2014.01.20 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh