RINKU BABU TRIPATHI Vs. RICHA TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cm No.27161/2018 (delay)

(2.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid order has led to the filing of the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant has strongly urged before the Court that the salary of the appellant is Rs. 17,510/- per month. It is further contended that in this amount he is looking after old aged parents and younger brother. It is, thus, contended that the amount which has been awarded by the Trial Court is on the higher side. He also relies on a decision in the case of "Kalyan Dey Chowdhury vs Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy", Civil Appeal No.5369 of 2017. More particularly, para 15 which we reproduced below:-

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also examined the order passed by the Family Court. The Family Court has taken into consideration the submissions made by both the parties. According to the wife, the husband is working as a Contractual Lab Technician in a private clinic and is earning Rs. 17,000/- per month. The husband has stated that the wife is also working as a beautician. The Family Court has only relied upon the salary certificate of the husband produced for the month of November, December 2017 and January 2018 respectively, according to which his salary is Rs. 17,510/- per month. The Family Court has also not placed reliance on a visiting card and copies of the photographs of signboard in the name of Dr. R.B. Tripathi and Tripathi Clinic placed on record by the wife to show that the husband is working with the said clinic part time and observed that the disputed question of fact would be considered and after the parties adduce evidence during trial.