KIRAN SURESH NARANG Vs. SURESH GHANSHAMDAS NARANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE parties, husband and wife, are Hindus. They were married on April 27, 1984 according to Hindu Vedic rites. Unfortunately, after the marriage, there was some unhappiness in the married life on account of which the respondent-husband was obliged to file M. J. Petition No. 362 of 1988 in the Second Family Court at Bombay for divorce, on appreciation of the evidence adduced before him, the learned Judge of the family Court dismissed the husband's petition for divorce but, at the same time, by the impugned judgment and order, dated July 4, 1991 granted an amount of Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance to the appellant-wife. The wife felt aggrieved by the maintenance order being inadequate and, therefore, filed the present appeal.

(2.) NOW, it is to be seen that the wife gave evidence in the trial Court that her husband was a businessman dealing with gold and silver ornaments and that he has two-bedroom ownership flat at Borivli and that he earns rs. 5,000/- per month. She had, therefore, demanded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- per month This evidence adduced by the wife could not be shattered in the cross-examination in any manner except making a suggestion to her that the husband was earning only Rs. 2,000/- per month. This suggestion was denied. The husband who entered into the witness-box gave quite cryptic evidence inasmuch he stated that he was earning only Rs. 2,000/-per month and not Rs. 5,000/-, However, he did admit in bis evidence that be is a broker and deals in gold and silver ornaments When that is so, it would be reasonable to infer that his monthly income would be much more than rs. 2000/ -. In the absence of any satisfactory evidence by the husband that his monthly income is only Rs. 2,000/- per month, we are inclined to accept the evidence of the wife that her husband earns Rs. 5,000/- per month. Under the circumstances, we are unable to persuade ourselves to agree with the finding of the learned trial Judge that the appellant-wife is entitled to only rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance.

(3.) IN the result, the appeal succeeds and the same is allowed. The impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial Judge is modified to the extent that the monthly allowance of maintenance granted by him to the appellant-wife is increased from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. l,500/-per month with effect from the date of the impugned order made by the learned trial Judge on July 4, 1991 There shall however, be no order as to costs. 4 When the parties were at dispute, the appellant-wife had filed Petition no. E/879 of 1989 under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code for maintenance and had asked for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per month. The same learned Judge of the Family Court No. 2, by another impugued judgment and order, dated July 4, 1991 disposed of the said application holding that it was not necessary to award separate maintenance to her in her petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Being aggrieved, the wife has filed Family Court Appeal No. 137 of 1991. We are not inclined to interfere with this order of the learned trial Judge as we substantially agree with him that once an order of maintenance having been made in the matrimonial proceedings between the parties, there was no need for making a separate order of maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure code. Therefore, this appeal fails and the same stands dismissed but with no order as to costs.