VINEETA VERMA Vs. BRAJNESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Counsel for the respondent.

(2.) By means of this appeal filed under Sec. 19 of Family Courts Act, 1948, an order dtd. 3/4/2024 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge-3, Family Court, Lucknow in Case No.118/2018, filed by opposite party under Sec. 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, has been challenged.

(3.) Contention of the appellant's Counsel is that while considering the application, though a lump sum amount of Rs.8,000.00 has been ordered to be paid towards litigation expenses and Rs.100.00 has been ordered to be paid on every date on which the date is fixed in the case, but the interim maintenance, as prayed for in the application which was to the tune of Rs.20,000.00 per month, has not been considered. Moreover, he says that the reason given therein is absolutely unsustainable as the Family Court has stated that only after evidence is adduced then it will be able to assess the social and economic status of the parties, meaning thereby it will consider the question of interim maintenance after the stage of adducing evidence, which is not the legal position, in fact it is gross ignorance of legal position on the subject in question. On being confronted, the learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that the relief prayed for has been granted, however, on being confronted with the relief prayed for in the application under Sec. 24, he accepted the fact that the question of interim maintenance has not been considered.