SANDEEP SANKHLA Vs. VANDANA SAINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having been directed to pay an interim maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month to the respondent- wife, inclusive of litigation expenses, from the date of the application till the disposal of the petition, the petitioner-husband has challenged the order dated 01.02.2018, passed by the I Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, before this Court.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife were married according to the Hindu rites and customs. However, during their matrimonial life, certain differences arose between the parties; they parted their ways. According to the petitioner, the respondent-wife deserted the husband in January 2015, and went back to her parental place in Rajasthan. Therefore he was constrained to file a divorce petition against the respondent-wife on the ground of desertion. During the course of the divorce proceeding, the respondent-wife filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for seeking an interim maintenance of Rs. 75,000/- per month from the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his objections. However, by the impugned order dated 01.02018, the learned Family Court has directed the petitioner to pay an interim maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month to the respondent. Hence this petition before this Court.

(3.) Mr. K. S. Bheemaiah, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that although the respondent had pleaded that the petitioner was a businessman, she did not produce any evidence with regard to his income. Therefore, the learned Family Court is unjustified in granting an interim maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- per month in favour of the respondent. Secondly, the interim maintenance amount of Rs. 25,000/- is too excessive an amount, which cannot be borne by the petitioner. Thirdly, since the respondent-wife is living in a village, an interim maintenance amount of Rs. 25,000/- is too large a sum to be paid to her for her maintenance. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, the said amount needs to be reduced by this Court.