JYOTSNA KRISHNAKUMAR TARKAR Vs. KRISHNAKUMAR SADANAN TARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the order passed by Family Court, Bandra in Petition No. E-558 of 1993 so far as quantum of alimony is concerned and she is making a prayer that the quantum of alimony awarded to her and her children be increased from Rs. 300/- to Rs. 500/- each, per month.

(2.) FEW facts need to be stated as mentioned below for understanding the matter in the proper tone. The petitioner and her husband respondent No. 1 krishnakumar Sadanan Tarkar married with each other on 7-2-76 according to Hindu religious rites at Mumbai and lived as husband and wife for considerable time. Three children were born out of that wedlock. First one was born on 4-12-76, second one was born on 25-5-85 and third one was born on 21-10-86. Their names are (1) Reena, (2) Prathmesh and (3) Omkar. The petitioner alleged in the petition that after marriage she started residing with respondent No. 1 at Kurla along with his father. Before the death her father-in-law told her that respondent Krishnakumar had kept a concubine who's name happens to be Suman Dharmaji Suryavanshi. After the death of the father-in-law of the petitioner Jyotsna, Krishnakumar started illtreating her and he made her life miserable. He did not permit her to use four rooms of matrimonial home and started beating her and her daughters without any reason. The illtreatment went to such an extent which compelled her, according to the say of the petitioner, to lodge a complaint with the police and on account of that a criminal case is pending in Vikroli Court in context with offences punishable under the provisions of section 498-A. During the pendency of the said petition and the desertion, petitioner Jyotsna learnt that respondent Krishnakumar is living with a mohamedian lady named Amina and is giving her entire salary. She averred therein that respondent Krishnakumar is serving in Bharat Petroleum Corporation and is earning salary to the tune of Rs. 4000/- to Rs. 5000/- per month. She averred that she is unable to maintain herself and her children mentioned above and therefore, prayer for alimony from her husband. The learned Magistrate allowed her application and granter her alimony to the tune of Rs. 300/- to Jyotsna and Rs. 200/-each to her children, namely, Reena, Prathmesh and Omkar with effect from the date of the petition i. e. 5-7-1993. He granted cost of Rs. 250/- also.

(3.) MS. Baxi, Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the learned judge has concluded after appreciating the evidence that the petitioner Jyotsna is unable to maintain herself and her children who are minors. However, the petitioner is having good salary and is getting more than Rs. 4300/ -. She pointed out that the learned Magistrate has come to the conclusion that pendency of criminal case initiated at the instance of police report in context with section 498-A I. P. C. is prima facie sufficient enough to show that the respondent Krishnakumar has illtreated the petitioner. She pointed out further that the factum of living Separately is also proved. According to Ms. Baxi, in these days of rising prices, Rs. 300/- for a woman like Jyotsna would be totally insufficient in Mumbai and Rs. 200/- for the growing children are totally insufficient. Mr. Shringarpure submitted that a just and proper order be passed in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.