ATUL SHARMA Vs. DEEPTI SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the order dated 05.04.2018 passed by the Family Court on an application filed by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking maintenance for herself and her minor son, who is 5 ' years of age. We may note that the Family Court has awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the appellant has strongly urged before this Court that the Family Court has failed to take into account that the appellant is doing panditai and is earning only Rs. 6,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Family Court has lost sight of the fact that for a person who is earning Rs. 6,000/- per month, it is impossible for him to pay maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month. Learned counsel also contends that the affidavit placed on record would show that the respondent claims that she is spending Rs. 10,000/- on groceries/food/personal care and clothing whereas admittedly she is residing at her parental house with her mother, brother and her sister-inlaw. Thus, in case, the amount of Rs. 10,000/- is being spent on food and groceries then the same is to be divided amongst five persons. Counsel for the appellant further contended that this amount is borne by her brother.

(2.) Counsel for the respondent submits that there is no infirmity and illegality in the impugned order. She further submits that it is unbelievable that a person who is a post-graduate and MBA earns only Rs. 6000/- per month. It is contended that in addition to performing Pooja, the appellant also runs various centers like Saparya Vastu Astro Research & Training Centre, Vartamana India Prediction Pvt. Ltd., Saparya Vastu Astro Point, Satyam Gamay and Shandilya Prakashan, which are being run by him and his family members. In addition, he is an editor in Satyam Gamay. It is submitted that he is author of various books including a book namely 'Rig-Vediya Sri Sukta', which has been produced before us. Counsel further submits that it is extremely difficult for the respondent to maintain herself and her 5 ' years old son and her presence in the house of her brother is also causing a rift amongst them.

(3.) We have heard learned counsels for both the parties and carefully examined the impugned order.