ASHRUKANA DAS Vs. RAJ KUMAR DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point emerged in this revisional application is whether the wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act having independent source of income which is grossly in disparity with the income of the husband.

(2.) Both the parties are at variance on the language employed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act. According to the learned Advocate for the petitioner, the expressions "maintenance" and "support" appeared in Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act are indicative of legislative intend that if the income of the wife is grossly despaired with the income of the husband, she is entitled to the maintenance from the husband to maintain and keep herself with the status of the husband in the society. On the other hand, the learned Advocate for the opposite party submits that the wife has an independent source of income, sufficient to support and maintain herself cannot be awarded maintenance under Section 36 of the said Act.

(3.) Admittedly the wife is working and earns at present Rs. 20,000/- per month from her salary. The husband who was associate Professor in a renowned educational institution was getting a sum of Rs. 58,000/- & odd per month and attained a superannuation on and from 1st April, 2011. The information received under Right to Information Act reveals that he would get a sum of Rs. 29,000/- & odd as pension and decided to commute 40% thereof. Apart from the same, he will get a sum of Rs. 18,78,492/- towards provident fund and Rs. 6 lakh's as gratuity. In addition thereto, he would receive a further sum of Rs. 9,32,510/- for leave salary. According to the husband, except the leave salary, he has not received any amount indicated in the said information as on this date.