2015 Supreme(Bom) 85
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S. OKA & A.S. GADKARI, JJ.
Nayana S. Gobbur – Appellant
Versus
Sudhir S. Gobbur – Respondent
Family Court Appeal No. 206 of 2013
Decided on: 03-02-2015
For the Appellant:Mandar Soman, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Vibhuti Desai i/b Atul G. Damle, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the maintenance awarded to a minor child should be commensurate with the parent's earnings and the child's growing needs.
Headnote:
Maintenance - Family Law - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13(1)(ia) - 2
Fact of the Case:
The Appellant-wife challenged the quantum of maintenance awarded to her minor daughter by the Family Court. The Respondent-husband did not challenge the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, which included a decree of divorce, maintenance for the daughter, and partition of certain properties.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the maintenance awarded to the minor daughter was inadequate and not in line with the husband's earnings. The Court quantified the monthly maintenance to be paid by the Respondent at Rs.25,000 per month, considering the growing needs of the minor child.
Issues: The main issue was the adequacy of the maintenance awarded to the minor daughter, considering the husband's earnings and the daughter's growing needs.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the contribution of the Respondent towards maintenance was not commensurate with the growing needs of the minor daughter, and therefore increased the maintenance to Rs.25,000 per month.
Final Decision: The appeal was partly allowed, and the Respondent was ordered to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000 per month to the minor daughter from the date of the judgment and decree.
A.S. Gadkari, J.
1. The Appellant-wife has questioned the correctness of the judgment and decree dated 2nd September 2013 passed by the Family Court No.3, Mumbai in Petition No.A-115 of 2007 and Petition No.B-1 of 2008 to the extent of quantum of maintenance awarded to her minor daughter namely Revati on the ground that the same is inadequate and not in consonance with the earnings of the Respondent-husband. The Appellant-wife had filed a petition before the Family Court at Bandra bearing M.J.Petition No.A-115 of 2007 against the Respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty, for maintenance for herself and her daughter Revati and for future expenses of the Appellant and towards education and marriage expenses of their daughter. The Respondent-husband has also preferred a petition bearing No.B-1 of 2008 against the Appellant/Petitioner for declaration of ownership in two properties and also claimed injunction of various sorts
2. It is to be noted here that the Respondent-husband has not challenged the judgment and decree passed by the learned Family Court No.3, Mumbai dated 2nd September 2013. In other words it can safely be said that the Respondent has accepted the same. The learned Family Court passed a decree of divorce. Maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month was directed to be paid by the Respondent to the minor daughter Revati while retaining the custody of her with the wife. Visitation right were granted to the Respondent. A decree of partition was passed as regards certain properties by holding that the appellant has 50% share in the same.
3. As stated hereinabove, the Appellant-wife has challenged the impugned judgment and decree dated 2nd September 2013 to the extent of quantum of the maintenance awarded to her minor daughter Revati by the present Appeal on the ground that the same is inadequate and not in consonance with the earnings of the husband. As the Respondent-husband has not challenged the correctness of the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, we are refraining ourselves from narrating the facts which deals with the aspect of divorce of the parties as per Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and are restricting ourselves to the extent of challenge to the quantum of the maintenance granted to the minor daughter by the impugned order.
4. The brief facts which lead to file the present appeal can be stated as under:
(i) The Appellant-wife in her petition before the Trial Court has stated that the Appellant and Respondent married each other on 11th December 2000 at Aurangabad. The daughter Revati was born on 19th April 2003 at Aurangabad. In her petition, the Appellant-wife has stated various incidents of cruelty on the part of the Respondent-husband. As per the Appellant-wife, culmination of said various incidents which were amounting to cruelty led her to file the said petition for divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
(ii) In paragraph no.23 of the petition, the Appellant has stated the Respondent’s income was to the tune of rupees one lac and above per month. That the Respondent had not been contributing to the expenses of the house. The Appellant was incurring the entire expenses for maintaining the house and herself and to meet the expenses of their daughter. That the salary of the Appellant was not sufficient to meet the expenses of the Appellant and her daughter and therefore, the Appellant had claimed maintenance of minimum amount of Rs.25,000/- per month from the Respondent towards maintenance of the Appellant and their daughter. The said petition was filed on 3rd January 2007. In the said petition, the Appellant had prayed before the Family Court that the Respondent be directed to pay to the Appellant the interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month from the date of filing of the said petition and suitable permanent maintenance/alimony for the Appellant and her daughter Revati