NEETA KHURANA Vs. SUNDER LAL KHURANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the wake of an application for divorce filed by the husband, the wife moved an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for maintenance pendente lite and for litigation expenses. The learned trial Judge allowed litigation expenses but disallowed maintenance pendente lite on the ground that the wife was in employment and had sufficient income of her own for her maintenance.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the wife has produced a certificate to the effect that she was in employment from February 25, 1981 to November 30, 1982. She was employed on temporary basis and she is no more in employment. This certificate is issued by the last employer. Learned counsel for the respondent could not controvert the correctness of this certificate issued by the last employer, M/s. Kanti Lal and Co. There is other material on record for not accepting the certificate. Consequently, I hold that the wife is not in employment and she does not have independent source of income sufficient for her maintenance.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to my notice that the husband is a businessman and runs Graduate Gas Agency and Graduate Engineering Works. He is an income tax assessee and the learned trial judge on appreciation of evidence came to the conclusion that the monthly income of the husband is not less than Rs, 4. 000/ -.