ABHISHEK GUPTA Vs. JYOTI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the revision petitions are against interim orders in matrimonial proceedings granting maintenance to the wife and child @ Rs.20,000/- and Rs.3,000/- per month, respectively. The order was passed by the Presiding Officer taking a statement made by the husband in Court that his monthly income was Rs.75,000/-. The revision petitions are filed by both husband and wife, the husband claiming in C.R.No.7284 of 2013 that the amount determined is very high while the wife has filed C.R.No.1123 of 2014 contending that the maintenance is too low.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the husband contends that his monthly income is only Rs.46,299/- and referred the document filed along with the application i.e. the pay slip for the month of August , 2014 issued by his employer Genpact India which would show his gross-pay is Rs.60,311/-. There are deductions to the tune of Rs.14,012/-. His contention is that the petitioner has to take care of his own expenses and pay rent of the premises in which he is residing. According to him, the Court below was in error in awarding interim maintenance without taking note of the wife's own resources. She had been having a distributorship of consumer products and she was an income tax assessee herself for the years 2009-10 upto 2011-12 and she has abandoned the distributorship only because she may lose one source of income to claim higher contribution from her husband. It is further contended on behalf of the husband that the wife is conducting private tuitions for school students and earn considerable amounts. Interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- both for the wife and the daughter will satisfy the reasonable requirements.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the wife points out that on the admissions made before the trial Judge the order was passed regarding his income status and would also refer to the income tax returns of the husband, the genuineness of which were admitted even before the Court below that showed that his annual income was over Rs.12 lacs and he was paying tax of Rs.2 lac annually. On such recognition it would be seen that the husband was earning nearly Rs.1 lac or more per month and the maintenance granted would be insufficient and thus, enhancement must be provided. Learned counsel also argues that even the amount which has been granted by the Court below has not been paid by the husband.