AVINASH @ RAHUL Vs. SUNIL INDORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, the respondent's minor son, has knocked at the doors of this Court for seeking justice. According to the petitioner, his father happens to be a lecturer at the Gokul Verma Rajkiya Polytechnic University. Vide order dated 22.4.2009, the Family Court, jodhpur, had directed the respondent to pay a maintenance of Rs. 1,800.00 per month to the petitioner-son. However, the petitioner has pleaded that an extremely meager amount has been paid for his maintenance. Hence, his prayer. that the maintenance should be enhanced to a respectful sum.

(2.) Mr. M.K. Trivedi, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that according to the salary certificate issued by the University, the respondent's gross income is Rs. 31,767/- per month, and, after, deduction, the take home salary is Rs. 26,295.82 per month. Therefore, the payment of merely Rs. 1,800.00 per month is an extremely unreasonable amount. Moreover, the petitioner, who is a child, needs to be educated and needs to be looked after. Therefore, the maintenance amount should be enhanced by this Court.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. Sanjay Mathur, the learned counsel for the respondent has strenuously contended that the petitioner's mother is herself employed as L.D.C. Hence, she has sufficient means for looking after the welfare of the child. Hence, the maintenance of Rs. 1,800.00 per month is more than just and reasonable.