ROHIT SHARMA Vs. SONIA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against an order of the Family Court dated 26.03.2013 whereby the learned Judge upon application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act fixed maintenance pendente lite in favour of the respondent wife @ Rs. 5,000/- per month.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that the appellant married the respondent on 10.03.2008 in Delhi. The couple does not have any child. The appellant works with the NIIT Technologies Ltd. in Gurgaon and earns approximately Rs. 25,000/- per month. Claiming that she does not have any independent source of income, the respondent wife moved the Court under Section 24, after the husband preferred a petition for divorce. Concededly, the wife had earlier moved an application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which was dismissed on 22.05.2012. It is also a matter of record that the wife had moved under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and has been granted maintenance @ Rs. 7000 per month. The appellant has carried that matter in appeal.

(3.) Counsel for the appellant urged that the Family Court fell into error in not appreciating the order of the Principle Judge, Family Court dated 22.05.2012 made under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Counsel particularly emphasized upon the observations in paragraphs 7 and 8 of that order to state that the respondent wife had earlier been employed and that the documents pertaining to those facts and the bank account statements produced in those proceedings persuaded the learned Judge to dismiss the application under Section 125. It was emphasized that the respondent wife is a career oriented woman and has been working. In these circumstances, submitted the counsel, the impugned order directing payment of Rs.5,000/- per month was not justified. Learned counsel has also relied upon the judgment of this Court in Damanpreet Kaur v. Indermeet Juneja & Anr. (Crl. Rev.P. 344/2011, decided on 14.05.2012).