AMRIK SINGH Vs. NIRMAL KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the respective pleas taken by them as also the perusal of the salary statement submitted by both the parties. I find that collectively both are earning about Rs. 1,60,000/- per month after deductions. It may be noticed that the deductions made in respect of GPF are not to be taken into consideration while deciding the application for seeking maintenance pendente lite, in the fact of this case the GPF deductions are being made almost equal in amount. Thus, the carry home salary earned by both of them is almost equal i.e. about Rs. 8000/- each. After giving the benefit of their personal expenses, for the education of each child and for incurring expenditures for their existence. It shall be appropriate if both of them are required to contribute Rs. 2000/- each for each child meaning thereby for three children Rs. 6000/- shall be required every month. It is admitted by the parties that all the three children are being looked after by the mother and they are in her custody and that they are studying in their respective schools under her supervision and that she is incurring the expenditure till now single-handedly apart from the amount which has been paid pursuant to the maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has argued that the similar application had been filed for seeking maintenance pendente lite before the trial Court and the order passed by the trial Court was challenged by way of C.R. No. 1986 of 1998 decided by this Court vide order dated August 17, 1998. The observations made by the Hon'ble Judge read as under :

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has argued that the order which has been referred to had been passed against the order which was passed by the trial court while seeking the maintenance pendente lite. The case had been decided by the trial Court and the appellant is in appeal against the said order and that the maintenance is being claimed during the pendency of the appeal.