SUSHMA KHANNA Vs. SURESH KHANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition u/s 115, CPC, is directed against the order of the ADJ, Delhi, dt. 1.12.80 directing the husband to pay a sum of Rs. 1000.00 as litigation expenses to the wife and Rs. 450.00 p.m. as maintenance for her support w.e.f. 30.9.80, the date when she made an application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act ('the Act') in proceedings for divorce u/s 13 of the Act.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts are that the marriage between the parties was solemnised according to Hindu rites at Delhi on 27.1.79. They lived together at Madras. The respondent is employed in I.T.C. Hotels. Previously the was posted at Hotel Chola, Madras but now the is posted at Jammu in Asia Hotel. The wife in her application u/s 24 of the Act, alleges that she has been in possession of few Share certificates of the value of Rs 2000.00 and that she has no other source of income. She has claimed Rs. 5000.00 as litigation expenses and Rs. 2000.00 per month as maintenance. The trial court has held that the wife is not in a position to support herself and that her income from the share certificates is Rs. 100.00 or Rs. 150.00p. a. and she has no other source of income. As regards the husband the trial court has concluded that his net monthly salary was Rs. 1137.00. The petitioner-wife feeling aggrieved has filed this revision. [S. 24 is then reproduced].

(3.) For determination of the amount payable first it has to be determined whether the applicant has any independent income sufficient for her support and to meet the litigation expenses. If it is held that he or she has no independent income, an order may be passed providing for maintenance and litigation expenses. The maintenance and litigation expenses are not in the nature of a permanent arrangement. It is only a temporary arrangement during the pendency of the proceedings under the Act. The amount on account of maintenance and litigation expenses has to be determined after taking into consideration the source of income of the opposite party. Section 24 of the Act requires the court to give a direction for monthly allowance such sum as it considers to be reasonable. Thus the statute does not require the court to make any mathematical calculation to arrive at any definite proportion of income of the opposite party for payment on account of maintenance or litigation expenses. The gross income of the opposite party has to be kept in mind for judging the standard of living. From the gross income one has to deduct the necessary expenses. The expenses may be compulsory or optional. Similarly there are various types of deductions made from the salary of an officer. The deduction may also be compulsory or optional. Compulsory expenses and deduction are to be deducted from the gross income and out of the balance a reasonable amount should be fixed for payment of the maintenance and the litigation. In other words, one has to determine the disposable income of the opposite party.