(1.) The present petition is filed for seeking following reliefs :
(2.) By the impugned order dated 29th Aug., 2013 an application below exhibit 7 filed in HMP No.18 of 2010 came to be partly allowed and the applicant of that application was directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000.00 per month as a part of maintenance from the date of application and it is this order which has been passed in an application filed under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act for which present petition has been filed before this court.
(3.) Mr. Amit R. Joshi, the Learned Advocate representing the petitioner has contended that the impugned order is passed without application of mind and while passing this order the fact of receiving an amount of Rs.10,000.00 per month by respondent is not taken into consideration. It has been contended that while preferring an application under section 24, the fact of receiving an amount of maintenance from the other proceedings have not been pointed out. As a result of which a serious error of jurisdiction is committed. It has been further contended that passed orders which have been passed between the petitioner and respondent in other proceedings have not been taken into consideration and the result of which an irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction is committed. The Learned Advocate Mr. Joshi has further contended that pursuant to an enhancement of maintenance proceedings, the respondent herein is getting an amount and therefore she is not entitle to claim any amount of maintenance in the present application and therefore, since the order in question is not supported by valid reasons, the exercise of jurisdiction is not justified. Mr. Joshi has further contended that simply because the petitioner is earning a good amount same would not permit respondent to claim exorbitant amount by way of maintenance and therefore the order in question is arbitrary, reflects clear non-application of mind hence, does not deserve to be sustained in the eye of law. No other submissions have been made.