JUDGMENT - S.B. MHASE, J.:---These two civil revision applications have been filed by the wife and husband respectively against each other challenging the order passed below Exhibit 10 from H.M.P. No. 19 of 1988. By the said order, the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon, has allowed the application of the wife i.e. the petitioner in C.R.A. No. 966 of 1989 by directing to pay Rs. 800/- towards the expenses of the litigation and Rs. 200/- per month towards interim maintenance to the wife w.e.f. 20-4-1988 i.e. the date of the application. And the payments of these were made as condition precedent for the purposes of the progress of the said proceeding. The wife has challenged this order dissatisfied with the inadequate amount of maintenance being awarded to her. The Civil Revision Application No. 211 of 1990 has been filed by the husband contending that the amount granted by the trial Court is exorbitant and in fact the trial Court should not have granted any interim alimony to the wife.

2. H.M.P. No. 19 of 1988 has been filed by the husband under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for getting the divorce on account of desertion from the wife. In the said application, the wife has preferred an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to Award interim alimony at the rate of Rs. 1500/- per month and Rs. 2000/- towards the litigation expenses.

3. The wife has stated that the respondent husband is having family business in the name and style of Geeta Medicals, Geeta Selection and Geeta Suppliers at Bhadgaon and yielding an income of Rs. 2,00,000/- per year and the respondent husband gets Rs. 5000/- per month and therefore the wife has claimed an amount of Rs. 1500/- per month by way of interim maintenance and an amount of Rs. 2000/- towards the expenses of litigation. In reply to the said application the husband has contended that he is not carrying on any business. His two brothers are carrying on the business and that he is maintained by his parents. He has no independent source of income and he is not in a position to pay any amount to her and that the application under section 125, Criminal Procedure Code by the wife has been rejected and ultimately submitted that the application be rejected.

4. It is an admitted position that there are three shops namely Geeta Medicals, Geeta Selections and Geeta Suppliers. The only contention is that they belong to the brother of the respondent husband. In the trial Court, no record was produced to point out that those shops belong to the brothers and the respondent husband is not having any right, title and interest in those shops and that those shops do not belong to the family as the family business. It may be mentioned that in civil revision application which has been filed by the husband at Exhibits B, C and D, the documents have been produced in respect of the income-tax assessment to show that the medical shop belong to Lalitkumar Nemichand Bamb who is one of the brothers of the respondent husband. It was tried to be pointed out that the status shown in the certificate of the Income-tax department is individual and shops belong to Lalitkumar. No doubt, these are the documents of the income-tax department, however had those been produced in the trial Court, the wife could have an opportunity to rebut those documents. Let the fact remain as it is. It was in fact for the husband to further point out, if he wanted to maintain that all these shops belong to his brother, as to how the funds were raised for the purposes of the said shops. Nothing has been brought on record to that effect. Even assuming for the sake of argument that these documents show that Geeta Medicals belong to one brother namely Lalitkumar, however in respect of the other two shops namely Geeta Suppliers and Geeta Selection, nothing has been brought on record that those concerns are individual concern of other brother or of Lalitkumar. The only submission made is that even though there is presumption in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document