SUDHA VERMA Vs. YOGESH KUMAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is delay of 287 days.Application No. 730/2018 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed seeking condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed. Delay in filing of the appeal is condoned.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties on the main appeal. This appeal is directed against order dated 24.04.2017 passed by the Family Court, Jhunjhunu (for short 'the Family Court') whereby application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') has been partly allowed and the appellant was awarded Rs. 2,000/- per month as maintenance; Rs. 1100/- as litigation expenses and Rs. 150/- towards travelling expenses for appearing on each date of hearing. The appellant filed and application under Section 13 of the Act against the respondent before the Family Court which is still pending. During pendency of the said application, the appellant filed an application under Section 24 of the Act for award of maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month as also Rs. 22,000/- towards fees of the advocate, Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation expenses and Rs. 1,000/- towards travelling allowance for appearing on each and every date before the court. The Family Court after hearing both the parties vide impugned order dated 24.04.2017 partly allowed the application of the appellant in the terms as stated above. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant challenged order dated 24.04.2017 before this Court by way of filing of Writ Petition No. 9749/2017 which was allowed to be withdrawn vide order dated 19.01.2018 with liberty to the appellant to file appeal against the order passed under Section 24 of the Act. It is argued that the Family Court has granted maintenance without taking into consideration the income of the respondent who is doing private job and getting salary of Rs. 40,000/- per month and also having income from plots, houses and interest. The total income of the respondent is approximately Rs. 60,000/- per month whereas the appellant is an unemployed lady and she is wholly depending upon her father and brothers. Thus, looking to the income of the respondent, the appellant is entitled to get maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- from the respondent but the Family Court has wrongly awarded only Rs. 2,000/- per month. It is submitted that it is the duty of the respondent to pay monthly maintenance to the appellant but the respondent failed to perform his duty and therefore the appellant is entitled to get Rs. 20,000/- per month from the respondent for maintenance. The amount of maintenance awarded by the Family Court is very meagre looking to the day to day increased cost of the daily use material and other materials. It is submitted that the appellant is presently living in Bagar which is a small city and the maintenance awarded by the Family Court is meagre for maintaining herself in that city. The Family Court has also erred in awarding the litigation expenses of only Rs. 1100/-. It is submitted that the appellant engaged counsel for preparing for defending the matter and the paid Rs. 22,000/- to her counsel for the same and also spent more than Rs. 5,000/- in preparing the documents but the Family Court has awarded only Rs. 1,100/- towards litigation expenses which is also a meagre amount.