IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the husband to maintain his wife, considering his financial capacity and the wife's need for support, as provided under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and relevant case law.

ORDER :

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 7-09-2023 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangalore in M.C.No.512 of 2022 connected with M.C.No.563 of 2022, whereby the concerned Court grants maintenance on an application filed by the wife/respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘the Act’ for short) at Rs.60,000/-per month.

2. Heard Sri D.R.Ravishankar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband.

3. The facts, in brief, adumbrated are as follows:-

The petitioner is the husband and the respondent is his wife. The two get married on 29-04-2002. After about 14 years of marriage, it appears that the relationship of the petitioner and the respondent turned sore and had virtually floundered. It is the case of the petitioner that the wife goes into depression in the year 2016 and had to be treated by a Psychiatrist for her mental illness. The petitioner, therefore, files a petition seeking annulment of marriage invoking Section 13(1)(ib) and (iii) of the Act in M.C.No.512 of 2022. The wife later files another petition seeking annulment of marriage invoking the provisions under the Act. Therefore, there were two petitions pending before the concerned Court in M.C.Nos.512 of 2022 and 563 of 2022, both for the same purpose – annulment of marriage. The issue in the lis does not concern merit of the claim of parties. In the petition filed by the petitioner/husband, the respondent/wife files an application seeking maintenance at the hands of the husband at Rs.1,50,000/-per month and Rs.50,000/-towards litigation expenses invoking Section 24 of the Act. The petition was filed through the sister of the wife. The concerned Court after considering the issue in its entirety qua the application, passes an order awarding maintenance at Rs.60,000/-per month to be paid by the husband on or before 7th of every month. It is this order that has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend with vehemence that the husband knows the position of the wife. He has led his life of fifteen years with the wife. She is now mentally unsound. Application is, therefore, preferred by her sister and maintenance at Rs.60,000/-is awarded to be paid to the wife. It is his submission that the money would not be utilized by the wife or for the wife but would be eaten away by others. It is his alternate submission that Rs.60,000/-granted is on the higher side and it may be reduced by 50% of the amount i.e., Rs.30,000/-per month. But, in effect he would seek quashment of the entire order.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned senior counsel and have perused the material on record.

6. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. Therefore, they would not require reiteration. The relationship between the parties and floundering of their relationship are as afore-noted. The Apex Court in the case of RAJNESH v. NEHA AND ANOTHER, (2021) 2 SCC 324 has laid down certain guidelines as to filing of affidavits by respective parties before concerned Courts to consider an application under Section 24 of the Act or the proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC or even claim of maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act. The concerned Court after taking note of respective affidavits filed by the parties makes its observations with regard to interim maintenance at Rs.60,000/-. The observations and the order read as follows:

“15. If the affidavit of the husband along with the documents produced by him are carefully considered, then it can be said that he not only possessing several properties, but his yearly income from all the sources is more than Rs. 83,00,000/-. If the same is divided in 12 months, then it comes to Rs.7,00,000/-per month approximately. It means the contention of the wife that he earns Rs.5,00,000/-appears to be just and proper. When the husband is having monthl