Dr. Narendra Vidyadhar Sardesai Vs. Shaila - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- section 10: [swatanter kumar, c.j., a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre, jj] admission to professional colleges - technical courses - publication of brochure on basis of which candidates seek admission to various institution keeping in mind their merit and preference of colleges held, for ensuring adherence to proper appreciation of an academic course, it is essential that the method of admission is just, fair and transparent. the first step in this direction would be publication of a brochure on the basis of which the applicants are supposed to aspire for admission to various institution keeping in mind their merit and preference of college. brochure, firstly has to be in conformity with law and the statutory scheme notified by the competent authority. it is a complete and composite document as it deals with the scheme for conducting their entrance examinations, declaration of results, general instructions and method of admission, etc. this brochure is binding on the applicants as well as the authorities. this brochure or admission notification issued by the state or other competent authority cannot be altered at a subsequent stage particularly once the process of admission has begun. there is hardly any exception to this accepted rule of law. section 10: [swatanter kumar, c.j., a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre,jj] admission to professional colleges - technical courses - approval to additional seats or to start new course - cut off dates held, the settled principle of law is that merit of the applicant is the primary criteria which would determine his rank as well as the college where he would be entitled to admission. this rule should not be frustrated as it will tantamount to entirely upsetting the object of admissions based on merit oriented method and would cast cloud on the fairness and transparency of the method of admission. one of the ways in which merit can be defeated is allowing increase in the intake strength or commencement if new colleges beyond cut-off date and admissions beyond the last date specified in the notification/calendar issued by the concerned authorities. this can be illustrated by giving an example. college a which is running a professional course like engineering or mba etc. has an intake capacity of 60 seats which has duly been notified in the information brochure. however, after the cut-off date, approval is granted by the aicte and thereafter, the process is taken up by the state and the intake capacity of the college is increased by 30 more seats. these seats would obviously, not be notified in the information brochure and the candidate who are meritorious and for whom college a; be the college of reference could not get seats or give preference as the seats were limited. none had the proper knowledge about the increase in intake of seats though at a much subsequent stage and may be even after the last date of admission is over either by themselves or under the order of the court even it is put on the internet or given in the newspaper, the candidates of higher rank or meritorious candidates would not be able to avail of that benefit because they have already submitted the testimonial, have paid their fees and the courses have commenced. in that situation, for variety of reasons, they may not be able to take admission in the institution of their higher preference while the candidates of much lower merit will be admitted to that course. besides defeating the merit, it has been commonly noticed that the late admissions made by the colleges directly effect notified candidates who have questioned it more than often as their admission process is not so just, fair and transparent which has given rise to the litigation. it is also a kind of back door entry method. another serious consequence that result from such admissions is shortening of the academic courses in an undesirable manner. it is expected of other candidate selected to a professional course that he or she would complete the course in its entirety and not by missing more than a month or so in joining the said course. this results in lowering the excellence of education as well as harms the academic standard of professional education. admission to professional colleges: [swatanter kumar, c.j., a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre, jj] technical courses - held, in process of admission to professional colleges relating to technical courses, primarily three institutional bodies are involved. (i) all india technical council for technical education, (ii) state of maharashtra through director of technical education and (iii) university to which such institution is affiliated the role of all these institutions in distinct and different but for a common object. primary of the rule of all india council for technical education (aicte) is now well settled but that certainly does not mean that role of the state government and for that matter the university is without any purpose or of no importance. the council is the authority constituted under the central act with the responsibility of maintaining education standards and judging upon the infra-structure and facilities available for imparting such professional education. its opinion is of utmost importance and shall take precedence over views of the state as well as that of the university. the concerned department of the state and the affiliating university has a role to pay but it is limited in its application. they cannot lay down any guidelines or policies which would be in conflict with the central statute or the students laid down a by the central body. state can frame its policy for admission to such professional courses but such policy again has to be in conformity with the directives issued by the central body. while the state grants its approval and university its affiliation for increased intake of seats or commencement for a new course/college, its directions should not offend and be repugnant to what has been laid down in the condition of approval granted by the central authority or council. what is most important is that all these authorities have to work ad idem as they all have a common object to achieve i.e. of proper imparting of education an ensuring maintenance of proper standards of education, examination and ensuring proper infrastructure for betterment of educational system. only if all these authorities work in a co-ordinated manner and with co-operation they would be able to achieve the very object for which all these entities exist admission to professional courses: [swatanter kumar, c.j.,a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre, jj] admission schedule - interference by courts held, all the expert bodies viz. aicte as well as directorate of education in consultation with the departments of the state regulating the process of admission and maintenance of standards of education had notified a legal binding document specifying dates and schedule for various matters in relation to admission of students and commencement of courses. there has to be so compelling circumstances and grounds before the court to interfere with the prescribed schedule. it is neither so arbitrary nor so perverse, keeping in view the essential features relating to imparting education to professional courses that it should invite judicial chastisement to the extent of laying down entirely new schedule. merely because there has been some delay on the part of either of these authorities to timely grant of either of these authorities to timely grant or decline approval and permission to commence a course per se would not be sufficient ground for disturbing the notified schedule and timely commencement of courses. - act'), for grant of interimmaintenance and expenses on 27-11-1990. by reserving her right to questionthe validity of the jurisdiction as well as her right to file written statementoh merits, she has contended that she has not served with the notice but thenotice was served to the other person and from him she received ah informationregarding 'filing of the petition by the petitioner under the head of divorceand hence came from bombay for attending the case. the applicant isrich man with influence in the society and he huge bungalow with garden,car, scooter and other luxurious items like vcr, t. he is enjoying very luxuriouslife and without any fault on her part, he has deprived her from all facilitiesand made her condition miserable. he has further denied that he is rich and an influentialperson or that he is having huge bungalow with garden as alleged. on the contrary without any faulton his part, the non-applicant made his life miserable. good salary. 21. no doubt that the non-applicant enjoyed all these facilities whenthe relations between the parties were cordial. however, one cannot bankupon and insist that despite unfortunate separation she is entitled to take samesuch treatment which she enjoyed previously. daga, the word income mentioned in section 24 of the act does not include capital assessed like land itincludes only return accrued from those assets. it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that in case one isusing vehicle for his personal work it is because, it has become expensive to goin auto-rickshaw or cycle rickshaw and it is even not safe to travel in suchvehicles.s.g. mutalik j.1. by the impugned order passed below ex. 7,in hindu marriage petition (hmp) no. 117/1990, the 4th joint civil judge,senior division, awarded maintenance pendente lite to the respondent-wife atthe rate of rs. 3000/- per month from the date of the application and rs. 3000/-as costs of the litigation. both the parties have challenged the said impugnedorder by filing civil revision application no. 1206 of 1991 (by the husbaad) original petitioner and cr.a. no. 149 of 1992 (by the wife)- original respondent. while deciding both these matters, the original petitioner is styled asthe applicant while original respondent no. is styled as the non-applicant.2. it is an admitted fact that the marriage between the parties tookplace on 15th december. 1967 and the parties have a son by name pranav aged about 22 years and daughter miss gouri aged about 21 years (vide theiraffidavits pages 63 and 69). for some years everything was going on smoothly between the parties. the applicant is highly qualified radiologist with all necessary equipments, x-ray machine including computer the non-applicant is also educated having passed her b.sc microbiology from bombayuniversity. even before the marriage, she was working in the milk schemeand other places at bombay. in hmp no. 117/90, the applicant has askedfor dissolution of the marriage by passing a decree of divorce on the groundof cruelty and desertion also. by effecting the amendment, the, petitionerhas added one more ground to the petition. it is alleged that the non-applicant is leading adulterous life and had illicit relations especially with respondent no. even prior to 1989. however, at this stage, it is not necessary to take into consideration these allegations because by filing separate civil revision application the non-applicant has challenged the said amendment by the trial judge.3. the non-applicant filed the application ex. 7 under section 24 ofthe hindu marriage act (for short 'the h.m. act'), for grant of interimmaintenance and expenses on 27-11-1990. by reserving her right to questionthe validity of the jurisdiction as well as her right to file written statementoh merits, she has contended that she has not served with the notice but thenotice was served to the other person and from him she received ah informationregarding 'filing of the petition by the petitioner under the head of divorceand hence came from bombay for attending the case. because of improperand treacherous treatment at the hands of the applicant, she is required totake temporary shelter at bombay under the compelling circumstances. shehas no source of income and unable to maintain herself. the applicant isrich man with influence in the society and he huge bungalow with garden,car, scooter and other luxurious items like vcr, t.v. electric washing machine, computer, electronic typewriter, cooler and his clinic is equippedwith an air-conditioner. he is also maintaining german highly pedigreeddogs and spending more than rs. 2,000/- p.m. for the same. he also spendsrs. 2,000/- for maintenance of the graden. he is enjoying very luxuriouslife and without any fault on her part, he has deprived her from all facilitiesand made her condition miserable. according to her, she being his wifeshe is entitled to live the life in similar way in which he is living.4. it is further contended that she has no house of her own atbombay nor having any income. she needs rs. 7,000/- p.m. by way ofmaintenance. she is required to spend rs. 3,000/-p.m. by way of residenceas paying guest. she has to spend on account of conveyance, the applicant is duty bound to supply the vehicle to her and in the alternative toprovide rs. 3500/- p.m. by way of conveyance charges and miscellaneousexpenses. she is suffering from physical disorders and scifiea. when shewas residing at akola with the applicant, she. being the doctor's wife, she wasgetting all medical aid free of costs from the other doctors. however, nowshe is required to spend rs. 500/- p.m. at the minimum for medical treatment.she further claimed rs. 5,000/-by way of expenses for the litigation, travelling charges etc; for attending the case. in respect of financial position ofthe applicant she has contended that the applicant is earning more thanrs. 15,000/-p,m. and he is living luxuriously and depriving her even of basicamenities of life.5. the applicant by his reply (page 33), denied she allegations. hehas denied the allegations of improper and treacherous treatment given toher as alleged. he has further denied that he is rich and an influentialperson or that he is having huge bungalow with garden as alleged. accordingto him it is only an ordinary size bungalow and he is not the exclusive owner.it is the property of the hindu undivided family. he has denied that thereis any garden but it is an open space with huge flower plants. it is notpossible for him to maintain any garden. he admits that he is having a carbut .'it is a second hand, purchased by him not for his luxury but for necessityfor his profession. he denied that he owns a scooter and all other luxuriousitems as alleged. he has electric washing machine but it is necessary for himbecause there is no other female in his house even to supervise domesticaffairs. he purchased these articles after the non-applicant left akola. heis required to lookafter domestic affairs and has to go to dispensary at 9.00a.m.6. he admits that he is possessing computer, typewriter, and cooler.the computer is a second hand one and is purchased at very cheap cost. as foe is practising as radiologist, computer, typewriter and cooler are necessitiesfor the clinic and they cannot be termed as luxury items. he is not possessingany air-conditioner or dogs as alleged. on the contrary the non-applicant isvery much fond of dogs and they wryer purchased by her. while leavingakola she did not take the dogs with her and he is forced to maintainthem. if she so desires she may take away the dogs with her.7. he further denied the amount of maintenance as claimed by her inthe application. according to him he is required to spend a sum of rs. 100/-to rs. 150/- p.m. for the dogs and not rs. 2,000/- pm. as alleged. heis not leading very luxurious life. he is residing alone at the residence anddoes not get even proper food. domestic servants ate not available andspecially for the timings during which he is at the residence. he is requiredto attend clinic from 9. am. to 9 p.m. on the contrary without any faulton his part, the non-applicant made his life miserable. it is dented that sheis entitled to live life in similar way in which he is living. he has furtherdenied that she requires rs. 3,000/- p.m. by way of residence or even conveyance charges and its maintenance. it is not known as to why and/or whatpurpose she needs the conveyance. even she cannot ask for such luxuriousitems under the garb of maintenance. he is not duty bound to. providevehicle to her or to make an alternate arrangement by providing rs. 3500/-p.m. for the same. even he has specifically denied her ailment and the amountfor medical expenses.8. he has further denied that he is earning much more than rs.15,000/- p.m. according to him his income is in range of rs. 5,500 to rs.6,000 p.m. in case if his income is calculated as contended by her, it wouldcome to rs. 1,80,000/- on which he will have to pay income-tax of rs 70,000/-however, he has to pay income-tax of rs. 14,000 to rs. 15,000/- only. whenshe had left for bombay he had sent rs. 8,000/- for her expenses.. thus henever neglected her. she of her own account and without any fault on his 'partis residing at bombay with her parents.. the amount which wos sent to herat bombay was sufficient for her maintenance. he has further denied hercontention in respect of rs. 5,000/- required by her to prosecute the hindumarriage petition pending against her and for travelling charges. he is requiredto maintain the clinic and has to spend for household expenses. he is furtherrequired to spend rs. 25,000/- per year for his daughter miss gouri who istaking education in private engineering college, shegaon. his son praven istaking education at pune and ho is required to spend rs. 10,000/- per year forhis education. thus he is heavily burdened with the expenses. he is requiredto maintain himself at akola by engaging servant as there is no other personin his family. he is also supposed to make provision for same future expenses.according to him if, unfortunately, at any time tube of x-ray machine goesout of order the replacement thereof costs over one lakhs rupees.9. it is further contended that he has to pay huge amount of intereston loan. he owes rs. 71,000/- to her which carries interest at the rate of15 per cent per annum. even the interest from the same which the non-applicant is receiving is sufficient for her maintenance. before the marriageshe has served as chemist with greater bombay milk scheme and was drawinga salary of rs. 500/-p.m. which was very handsome salary in those days. itis further contended that she served with the indian council of medical research and was getting handsome salary. even after her marriage with himshe served in his clinic for which he was giving her. good salary. she hadtaken agency of pest control of india ltd; for akola district. she wasselling insecticides to punjabrao krushi vidyapeeth, municipal council, akolaand even to the district court, akola and was earning handsome amount byway of commission. she was also selling utensils. she had fancy for thedogs and was selling its puppy at very handsome price and was thus makingmoney out of it. she was running coaching classes at akola for differentsubjects and number of students used to attend the same. she was earninggood money out of fees from such students. in short according to him, asthe non-applicant has sufficient income of her own, it is not necessary toaward maintenance pendente lite as contended and prayed for dismissing theapplication.10. the learned trial judge, after considering the affidavits filed bythe parties awarded maintenance pendente lite at the rate of rs. 3,000/- p.m.from the date of the application and further awarded rs. 3,000/- to cover theexpenses of the litigation etc, the said impugned order is challenged by boththe parties by filing separate civil revision applications.11. i have heard the arguments of shri v.c. daga and mrs. k.v.sirpurkar learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. though shriv.c. daga learned counsel for the applicant has advanced arguments inrespect of the amendment carried out by the applicant about his allegation ofadultery against the non-appellant as stated above it is not possible to take intoconsideration these allegations at this stage especially when the non-applicanthas challenged the said impugned order of amendment by filing the separatecivil revision application.12. in both these matters it is necessary to see if the impugned orderpassed by the trial judge suffers from any illegality.13. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant thatonly bare allegation is made by the non-applicant that the applicant is earningrs. 15,000/-p.m. from his profession. however, she has not at all given thefigures of his net income after deducting number of expenses. he furthersubmits that the other liabilities of the applicant are not at all taken intoconsideration. even no provision is shown by her in respect of income-taxliability of the applicant. similarly, personal expenses of the applicant arealso not taken into consideration, for which proper reply is given by theapplicant.14. he further submitted that in the application ex. 6, she has notcontended anything about her own earning and has given inflated figures of theitems of so called expenses. he further criticised the reply given by her in crano. 1206 of 1991 dated 24-1-1992. according to him, in the application ex. 7,she has contended that she has absolutely no source of income. she never gaveany particular figures and heads of expenses to be incurred by her. however,in her say she has tried to give clarification in respect of the same. at the sametime while giving reply to the applicant under order 41 rule 27, c.p.c. and theaffidavits filed by the applicant, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant thatshe has admitted about the classes conducted by her and also the incomederived from the same. further she has given clarification that she receivedonly paltry amount which was paid by way of fees to all those students whoattended the classes. on behalf of the non-applicant, mrs. sirpurkar submittedthat the applicant filed the application hmp no. 117/90 on 24-10-1990.according to the learned counsel, when the application ex. 7 was filed at thattime non-applicant came from bombay to akola to prosecute the same and atthat time she was not at all earning anything muchless, conducting any classesfor the students.15. it is further submitted that only during summer vacation she conducted the classes for those students who were to appear for competitiveexamination and some of them paid her fees while the others were unable topay. according to the learned counsel for the non-applicant, those classes wereconducted only during the vacation in the year 1991-92 from which the non-applicant earned some amount but that was not at all sufficient for her maintenance. it was more a social work than the work to earn livelihood. though,it is contended by the applicant that the non-applicant was fond of dogs andshe used to sell the puppy and that she was getting separate income from thesame. it is submitted that even though the receipt in respect of sale of the dogsissued by one d.r. bhat is in favour of the non-applicant, it is submitted thatshe received this amount when she was residing with the applicant and evenshe was required to spend the said amount for household purposes.16. the certificates at pages 49 and 50 issued by the indian nationalkennel club are dated 13-3-1987 and the same came to be transferred on thename of the non-applicant and on 20-4-1987. as such even assuming forthe sake of argument that the non-applicant had earned some amount by wayof sale of the dogs it was before the difference between the parties and especially when the non-applicant was residing with the applicant. there is muchsubstance in the contention raised on behalf of the non-applicant that whateverearning she got from sale of the puppies, she was required to spend for house-hold expenses.17. much is made about the affidavits of various students who attended the said classes conducted by the non-applicant during the vacations. shritimishchandra shivshankar jani in the affidavit has stated that when he hadgone to the residence of one kanubhai in second week of may, 1991 . kanubhaiinformed him about the dispute between the' present parties and they wereknown to him by name. he also came to know that the non-applicant wasstudying with him and he asked him as to whether he would allow her to taketutorial classes at his place so that he would earn. thereafter, he had talkedwith the non-applicant and who informed him about her experience of teaching students since long. after discussion he permitted her to take englishconversation and composition classes at his residence and she, however, toldhim that she would charge rs. 125/- p.m. for each student. he has furthergiven list of 17 students who showed willingness to attend those vacationclasses. even his two daughters also attended the classes. he has further statedabout some corrections made by the non-applicant in the note-book of thestudents and his daughters. mr. madhukar shivram wakchaware, dr. vijayramkrishna hiwarale, who is practising homeopathy medicine and othershave sworn the affidavits accordingly. all of them have stated that theyattended the classes conducted by her, during the vacation. even some of themattended the classes in respect of competitive examinations of the nationalisedbanks.18. even if their affidavits are taken into consideration, at the most itcan be said that the non-applicant received only some couple of thousandrupees as income by conducting the classes. however, no inference can bedrawn that she earned practically the same amount every month even subsequently.19. the applicant has contended that he has taken a loan ofrs. 71,000/- from the non-applicant for which he is paying interest at the rateof 15% p. a. however, it is submitted at the bar that even till today the non-applicant has not received an interest separately from the applicant. it may bebecause during that period she was residing with the applicant. however, theapplicant admitted that he will pay the interest on the said amount.20. while considering further arguments advanced by learned counselfor the parties, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the non-applicantis educated. she knows how to earn. she was earning right from her maidendays.'she knows how to develop public relations. she is painstaking and as alsoselling pesticides. she has an art of teaching various subjects. she worked asp.a. to dr. sardesai and she is industrious also. hence, it is submitted that herapplication under section 24 of the h.m. act should be approached fromdifferent angle. both learned counsel for the parties agreed that while fixingthe amount of maintenance it is necessary to take into consideration (1) statusof the parties (2) wife who was then living with her husband and luxuriousand necessary amenities provided to her during that period, (3) necessitities oflife, though some of the items might be luxurious, but, now a days they havebecome necessitates of life, and lastly, (4) her social status.21. no doubt that the non-applicant enjoyed all these facilities whenthe relations between the parties were cordial. however, one cannot bankupon and insist that despite unfortunate separation she is entitled to take samesuch treatment which she enjoyed previously. at the same time one will have togive some latitude to the earning of the applicant and the contingent unforseenexpenses in his profession. simply because the wife was moving in car beforethe proceedings that does not mean that the husband should provide-car to her.in view of the changing circumstances, certainly the non-applicant will have toadjust herself to the situation and the amount that will be received by herunder section 24 of the h.m. act.22. it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that his earnings are notmore than rs. 5,500 to rs. 6000/- p.m. he has also filed the assessment ordersof the income tax department (pages 53 -and 54). during the assessment year1989-90, his total taxable income with all permissible deductions is calculated atrs. 40, 855. similarly, during the assessment year 1990-91, the taxable incomeis assessed at rs. 63,317. it is submitted on behalf of the non-applicant that theapplicant is earning much more than rs. 15,000/-p.m. it is further submittedthat the non-applicant stayed with the applicant for number of years after themarriage and being wife, she is having full knowledge about his income.23. the income shown in the assessment year cannot be treated astrue and correct. however, especially when the assessment orders' of theincome-tax department are filed on the record, no such inference can be drawnabout the income of the applicant as assessed by the non-applicant. even aftergiving some latitude to the income of the applicant, certainly, the amount ofrs. 7,000/- p. m. claimed by the non-applicant is ordinarily heavy and eyenbeyond her requirements. it cannot be forgotten that the applicant is to maintain himself, his residence, his clinic, pay for education of his two children; socalled luxurious items as stated by the non-applicant cannot be treated sobecause even for the medical profession of the applicant these are the necessaryamenities. there may be vcr, television, cooking range at the residence, air-conditioner, cooler etc; some times in the past these items might have beentreated as luxurious but in present days they have become necessities of life.24. it is submitted by mrs. sirpurkar that formerly, view of varioushigh court was that the wife should get at least l/5th of the amount of incomeof the husband but this view is subsequently changed and in various rulings itis held that the wife is entitled to get l/3rd of the amount out of income of thehusband. at the same time it is submitted by shri v.c. daga that even theamount awarded to the non-applicant by the trial judge of rs. 3000 p.m. isinordinately heavy, because, the total amount for one year would come tors. 36,000/- (rs. 3000 x 12 months). in case if the applicant is required to paythis amount it is an additional burden upon him and perhaps nothing will beleft for him to maintain himself. even to some extent, the argument advancedby shri daga deserves close consideration. though it is argued on behalf of theapplicant that when out serious allegations of adultery are made against the wifeshe is not entitled to claim interim alimony.25. however, this argument cannot be accepted because in the firstcase though the amendment is sought by the applicant and though he has madeit, it is challenged in this court. moreover, in the ruling reported in dwarkadasgurumukhdas agrawal v. bhanuben : air1986guj8 , it is observed that theright of wife under section 24 and section 25 of the h.m. act, cannot be,negatived by the allegation of adultery in the proceedings. shri v.c. daga hasfurther placed reliance on the ruling reported in bhagwan,dutt v. smt. kamladevi and another : 1975crilj40 . the observations are made in a caseunder section 488, cr. p.c. 1988 and it is observed that in determining theamount the magistrate is competent to take into consideration the separateincome and means of wife. it is further observed that scope of section 23 ofthe hindu adoptions and maintenance act and section 488 are different.26. however, even this ruling is not at all applicable as far as presentmatters are concerned. according to shri v.c. daga, the word income mentioned in section 24 of the act does not include capital assessed like land itincludes only return accrued from those assets. the property which is notpresently yielding any income is not to be included. however, in the presentcase the income of the applicant as shown in the income tax return is only takeninto consideration. at the same time proposition laid down in the rulingreported in baboolal v. smt premlata (air 1974 rajasthan 93) that the maintenance pendente lite would be granted only if she (wife) has no independentincome of her own sufficient for her support.27. as observed above it is brought on the record by the applicantthat the non-applicant earns some amount by taking coaching classes duringthe vacation but, that cannot be termed as her permanent income. as statedabove, it is held that she has no independent permanent source of income.28. mrs. sirpurkar then has placed reliance on the ruling reported iudev dutt singh v. smt. rajni gandhi air 1984 delhi 320, in which followingobservations are made.'what is a proper proportion of the husband's income to begiven to the wife as maintenance pendente lite is a question to bedetermined in the light of all the circumstances of a particular case.section 34 is not a code of rigid and inflexible rules, arbitrarilyordained and to be blindly obeyed. it leaves everything to the judge'sdiscretion. it does not enact any mathematical formulae of one thirdor any other proportion. it gives wide power, flexible and elastic todo justice in a given case.'29. though it is observed that in determining the husband's disposable income amount deposited by him in public provident fund ought to betaken into account. in the present case, the non-applicant has not stated evensingle word, if the applicant has kept such amount or his other assets by wayof national savings certificates, fixed deposit receipts etc; only a reference isgiven to the same which is not substantiated.30. the evidence is brought on the record by the applicant thatrecently the non-applicant has purchased bajaj m. 80 scooter by spendingrs. 15,000/- or so. it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that if the non-applicant is not serving any where why she purchased a scooter bajaj m 80 byspending rs. 15,000/- and especially when she was suffering from the diseases asstated above. it is further submitted that if she was so hard-pressed finanicallyit was not necessary for her to purchase the vehicle, and she purchased it forher own fancy. even to some extent it is a sound argument which appeals toreason. however, even now a days two wheeler is not a luxury but an ordinarynecessity of life. it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that in case one isusing vehicle for his personal work it is because, it has become expensive to goin auto-rickshaw or cycle rickshaw and it is even not safe to travel in suchvehicles. however, when the non-applicant was accustomed to move in the carduring her past days, at least, there is no harm if she purchased two wheelersfor her own use and which no doubt can be considered necessity and notluxury.31. in view of the foregoing discussion last point to be considered iswhether maintenance awarded by the trial judge needs interference. thoughat the initial stage the non-applicant claimed rs. 7000/- by way of maintenance,at the time of hearing. mrs. sirpurkar filed one statement by which she claimedmaintenance at the rate of rs. 12,000/- p.m. and detailed figures of all theseitems are given. according to her rs. 2,000/- are required for house rent including water and electricity charges, rs. 3000/-for non vegetarian food, milk,bread, butter, fruits, groccery, etc; rs. 50/- for medical expenses, and rs. 1000,on misc. accounts. then amount of rs. 1,000/- is given under category contingency and lastly on account of clothings rs. 2,000/-.32. on the other hand the applicant has estimated her monthly incomeat rs. 1490/-and the details of the same are as follows:'(1) two time meals in the form of tiffin from boarding housers.400/-(2)house rent for a modest house with 1 room and kitchen atakola rs.400/-(3)milk (daily) rs. 120/-(4)grocery (sugar, tea and other articles) rs. 100/-(5)soap charges:-(2) bathing soaps 2 xrs. 6= rs. 12(6) rin washing state rs. 5.50 =rs. ll=rs. 25/-(6) electricity charges 11000/-(7)expenses on account of clothes rs. 250 x 3==rs. 750/rs. 225 p.m.rs. 400 x3=rs. 1200/- per year .other clothes rs. 750/-(8)library fees rs. 25/-(9)medicines rs. 100/- ------------total rs. 1490/-------------(rupees one thousand four hundred and ninety only),'33. thus practically there is vast variance in both these statementsespecially, when the non-applicant has purchased the vehicle.she is not entitledof a sum of rs.1,000/- for conveyance as claimed by her. at the most a sumof rs. 5000/- for the same can be provided for expenses of scooter repairs.34. the amount which she has claimed under different head is inordmately heavy. even at the time of the argument it is submitted on behalf of thenon-applicant that taking into consideration her health she requires telephoneat the residence. she is further expecting a services of choukidar and a fulltime maid servant at her residence. this particular expectation is rather toomuch. moreover, when a person has crossed 40 years of his age one should outall restrictions on dietary habits. on the contrary it appears that needs of thenon-applicant are increasing day by day for no valid reasons. it also appears thatshe is expecting too much from the applicant. at the same time estimate of themonthly expenses derived by the applicant is somewhat too low one will haveto take into consideration trend of rising prices of common commodities atthe same time even it is not expected from the non-applicant that she shouldrush to the court and ask for enhancement of the amount of maintenance.35. though reliance is placed by mrs. sirpurkar on the.ruling reportedin chitra sengupta v. dhruba jyoti sengupta ii (1987) dmc 162 in this rulingincome of the husband is rs. 40,000/- a year. maintenance is awarded at therate of rs. 7,000/- p. year and rs. 10,000/- as cost of the litigation. all otherrulings which are shown by mrs. sirpurkar are in respect of quantum of maintenance but at the same time one will have to take into consideration incomeof the applicant and the expenses which he is required to incur even if a sumof rs, 3,000/- as awarded by the trial judge is to be confirmed, the applicantwill be getting rs. 36,000/- per year and that amount will be even more thanhalf the amount of the applicant. however. i am only inclined to deduct theamount of rs. 1,000/- which the non-applicant has claimed as conveyancecharges and instead of that for maintenance of vehicle, for petrol expenses etcan amount of rs. 500/- is awarded to her instead of rs. 1,000/- at the sametime the applicant has expressed his willingness to pay rs 1 000/-p m to heras the amount of interest on a sum of rs. 71,000/- which is with him' a direction is given to the applicant to pay the same separately, from the date ofapplication.36. by the impugned order the maintenance is awarded to the nonapplicant at the rate of rs. 3,000/- p.m. from the date of the applicant. however, i am only modifying the said order, in view of the foregoing discussion bypartly allowing the civil revision application no. 1206/1991 filed by theapplicant dr. n.b. sardesai against the non-applicant.37. he shall pay a sum of rs. 2500/- p.m by way of maintenance.plus rs. 1000/- p. m, by way of interest, which the applicant dr.n.v.sardesaihas agreed to pay the same. thus in all rs. 3500/- p.m. is awarded to the non applicant from the date of the application 38. during the pendency of both these civil revision applications,the applicant paid her rs.5,000/- and as per the interim per the interim order in crano. 1206/91, he was directed to deposit rs. 1500/- p.m. in the trial court thesaid amount is to be adjusted while calculating the arrears of maintenance39. dr n.v. sardesai the applicant is further directed to make thecalculation of the amount of maintenance which is awarded to her-the amountpaid by him and deposited by him in the court and deposit the arrears withinthe period of three months from today.40. in the circumstances both the civil revision applications standdisposed of with no order as to costs.