J.LESLIE ARULKUMAR Vs. P.PRADEEBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter was listed today under the caption, -for admission-.

(2.) The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been directed against the fair and decreetal order dtd. 1/12/2020 made in I.A.No.591 of 2018 in DOP.No.1083/2018 by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Additional Principal Family Court, Coimbatore, thereby directing the appellant-husband to pay a sum of Rs.10,000.00 p.m. as interim maintenance to the respondent-wife pending litigation from the date of filing of the application and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000.00 towards litigation expenses.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-husband pleaded that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 19/5/2016 at All Soul's Church, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore, as per the Christian rites and customs and due to some misunderstanding that arose between them, the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home at Mumbai on 13/1/2018 and came back to her parental home at Coimbatore. Since all the mediation talks initiated by the appellant were failed, he filed D.O.P.No.1083/2018 before the Family Court, Coimbatore seeking divorce. Pending the Original Petition, the respondent wife has filed I.A.No.519/2019 in D.O.P.No.1083/2018 seeking interim maintenance. The learned Counsel further pleaded that when the respondent-wife has already filed a case for maintenance in M.C.No.136/2018, filing yet another petition seeking interim maintenance would amount to abuse of process of law. Moreover, when the respondent-wife had already left the matrimonial home and started living with her parents who are employees of State Government as well as Central Government respectively, the respondent-wife is not entitled to get any maintenance. Adding further, it is pleaded that when the respondent-wife who is willing to live with her parents to lead a luxurious life in her parental home without even disproving the allegation and desertion levelled against the appellant-husband, she is not entitled to maintain two petition seeking maintenance, one in M.C.No.136/2018 and another in I.A.No.591/2018 in DOP.No.1083/2018 before the learned Additional Principal Judge, Additional Principal Family Court, Coimbatore in which the present impugned order has been passed. The learned Counsel for the appellant also pleaded that when the respondent-wife is a highly qualified person possessing M.B.A. Post Graduate Degree that shows that she is capable of leading an independent life. But without considering the said plea, the interim maintenance application has been allowed by directing the appellant- husband to pay a sum of Rs.10,000.00 p.m. towards maintenance. Moreover when the respondent-wife has filed the interim maintenance application seeking interim maintenance on the ground that the appellant-husband has been earning a sum of Rs.1,00,000.00 p.m. by working as Manager in Tata Consultancy Services, Mumbai, but no proof whatsoever has been placed the lower court whether the appellant has been receiving such a huge monthly salary. Without even considering the fact that the respondent has come to the court with bald allegation, directing the appellant-husband to pay a sum of Rs.10,000.00 p.m. as monthly maintenance and Rs.5,000.00 towards litigation charges is unfounded and unjustifiable. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside, it is pleaded.