SANGANAGOUDA Vs. MUKTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MARRIAGE of the petitioner and respondent was solemnised on 04.05.1992. There being incompatibility, the parties are living separately. On 02.03.2012, the petitioner filed M.C. No. 32/2012 in the Court of Senior Civil Fudge, Gadag, to pass a decree of divorce and dissolve the marriage. I.A. No. 1/2012 was field by respondent, on 15.12.2012, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') to award pendente lite maintenance and litigation expenses. Despite the statement of objections filed on 29.01.2013, I.A. No. 1/2012 having been allowed on 17.07.2014, directing the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/ - per month, from the date of petition was filed and Rs. 20,000/ - towards litigation expenses, this writ petition was filed on 20.08.2014, to quash the said order and dismiss I.A. No. 1/2012 filed in the trial court.

(2.) SRI . Chandrashekhar P. Patil, learned advocate, contended that the interim maintenance awarded is highly excessive. He submitted that the petitioner has paid interim maintenance at Rs. 5,000/ - per month, since 1997 till 2012 and in the circumstances, interference is called for, more particularly, with regard to the period from which the interim maintenance is payable. Learned advocate submitted that I.A. No. 1/2012 having been filed on 15.12.2012, direction issued to pay the interim maintenance from 02.03.2012 is wholly erroneous. He further submitted that Rs. 55,000/ - having been paid in the trial court, the learned Family Judge has committed an error in not providing for deduction of the said amount, while passing the impugned order.

(3.) CONSIDERED the rival contentions and perused the writ petition.