ABHISHEK JAIN Vs. PRIYANKA JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed an order dated 6th July, 2009, whereby learned District & Sessions Judge, Delhi, allowed an application under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, moved by the respondent and fixed a maintenance of Rs. 50,000/- per month (Rs. 35,000/- per month for the respondent and Rs. 15,000/- per month for the minor son).

(2.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Trial Court wrongly considered that the date of e-mail from the company telling him not to come to office was 31st March, 2009 while his resignation letter was dated 8th February, 2009. He has filed hardcopy of the e-mail where 31st March, 2009 was given as the date of printing of the e-mail and the date of e-mail was given as 18th February, 2009. The other ground taken by the petitioner is that the learned Trial Court had not considered that the petitioner was not in job from March, 2009 till withdrawal of the petition and he should not have been burdened with payment of maintenance for this period. He further submitted that the Trial Court also ignored the photographs placed by the petitioner on record showing that the respondent was entertaining customers at a stall in exhibition.

(3.) It is reflected from the e-mail referred to by the petitioner that he was working as Vice President in Media Company whereas the petitioner had claimed himself to be a consultant. Since it is a case of the petitioner himself that he had resigned from the job, he could have placed on record letter accepting his resignation and settling his accounts by the employer. Merely referring to an e-mail where his senior has given a reprimand that if the work was not done by the target date, the team members need not come to office, does not show that resignation of the petitioner was accepted. When an employee, that also of the level of Vice President, resigns, his accounts are settled and appropriate documentation is prepared. The petitioner had not placed before the Trial Court document showing that he had finally left the company and settled his accounts with the company. No doubt, the e-mail is a valid mode of communication but the e-mail of the kind, referred to by the petitioner, does not amount to resignation of the petitioner.