SONU Vs. ANITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 21.4.2010 passed by the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad whereby in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ad-interim maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- per month has been awarded to the respondent-wife.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is working as a casual labourer and as per the pay register for the month of May 2010 (Annexure-P.1) which is filed his gross basic pay is Rs. 4,342/- and after deductions he is getting Rs. 2,078/-. Therefore, it is submitted that the interim maintenance granted by the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad is highly excessive.

(3.) I have given my thoughtful consideration to the mater. It may be noticed that the respondent-wife filed an application for grant of maintenance allowance @ Rs. 8,000/- per month. The marriage between the parties was solemnized at Faridabad on 20.4.2007. In the reply to the application, the petitioner-husband stated that he was doing labour work; besides, the respondent wife has sufficient income as she was doing tailoring work as well as tuition work and she was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month. The learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad observed that the respondent-wife has stated that the petitioner-husband was an employee in a private concern and was drawing salary of Rs. 10,000/- per month; besides, he had rental income of Rs. 10,000/- per month. In the circumstances, the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad assessed the amount payable at Rs. 4,000/- per month as ad-interim maintenance. The order passed by the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad is dated 21.4.2010 and the certificate (Annexure-P.1) which has now been submitted is pay register for the month of May 2010. Therefore, the said certificate evidently was not produced before the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad. Even otherwise a perusal of the said certificate shows that the date of joining the concern by the petitioner is 1.9.2009. Therefore, the petitioner was in a position to submit his pay register certificate for the period after 1.9.2009 till the time he filed his reply before the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad which is dated 10.11.2009. However, he did not file any such certificate from pay register as has now been filed. Therefore, no fault can be found in the order of the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad. However, since now some material has been produced with regard to the pay of the petitioner, the petitioner may, if so advised, approach the learned District Judge Family Court, Faridabad for modification of the order of granting ad-interim maintenance in view of the document now placed on record.