Judgment:
J.N. Patel, J.
1. This C.R.A. is filed challenging the order passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Sr. Dn., Nagpur under which the applicant-wife was granted maintenance only @ Rs. 500/- p.m. from the date of filing of the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, instead of Rs. 6,000/- p.m. as claimed. It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant-wife that the application filed by the applicant-wife for maintenance was on affidavit supported by documents to which the non-applicant husband failed to file any reply and though it was prayed by the applicant-wife to grant her Rs. 6,000/- per month as maintenance from March, 1995, the Court granted a meagre amount of Rs. 500/- p.m. It was the case of the applicant-wife that the non-applicant/husband is a lecturer in Vishwa-Vyapi College Vulture and earning an amount of Rs. 5.000/- p.m. In addition to this he is also working as a reporter of Vasavi Advertising Agency and earning approximately a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and also he is taking tuition classes out of which he earns Rs. 5,000/- p.m. and so the monthly income of the non-applicant/husband is about Rs. 20,000/- p.m. and as such there was no reason why the Court should not have granted her Rs. 6,000/- p.m. towards the maintenance.
2. The learned Counsel appearing for non-applicant/husband submits that the non-applicant/husband has lost his job and he has to maintain his aged parents, the non-applicant has denied that he has any additional income by way of being a reporter of Vasavi Advertising Agency as he was working there as free-lance without charging anything and also he has no other source of income. The fact that the parties got married on 18.11.1985, their relationship as husband and wife and that the wife has no source of income is not in dispute. There is a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce pending before the Family Court. This Court finds that the impugned order can not be sustained for the following reasons.
3. The learned Trial Court has not given any reason as to how the learned Court has come to the finding that the amount of Rs. 500/- would be sufficient towards the maintenance of the wife. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that two children born out of the wedlock are presently residing with the applicant-wife. The Trial Court further ignored the documents filed in support of the application i.e. the salary certificate which shows that in October, 1995 the total salary drawn up by the non-applicant was Rs. 6,240/-. Even if the contention of the non-applicant/husband accepted that he was working as a reporter of Vasavi Advertising Agency without any income and that he was not taking any tuition, still the wife would be entitled for 1 /3rd of the income of the husband considering the status of the non-applicant husband who is working as Lecturer and that she has to maintain two children. The maintenance includes provision for food, clothing, residence, education, medical expenses which are bare necessities of life. Considering all these circumstances the findings of the learned Trial Court can not be sustained.
4. During the course of hearing, it was agreed by the learned Counsel for the non-applicant-husband that without going into the merits of the matter, the non-applicant would pay Rs. 1000/- p.m. towards maintenance as well as Rs. 1000/-towards the expenses of the litigation to the wife. In this circumstance the impugned order is modified to the extent that the non-applicant-husband shall pay Rs. 1000/- p.m. to the applicant-wife from the date of application Under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and also pay Rs. 1000/- towards the expenses of the litigation. Rule is made absolute accordingly.