There is no rule of adjustment between maintenance awarded under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and maintenance awarded under section 125 of the Cr.PC. The Court must consider the actual income of the husband and the welfare of the wife and children. The husband's concealment of income will result in an adverse inference.

HARISH TANDON, J.

1. This revisional application is directed against an Order No. 40 dated 9th August, 2016 passed by the Learned Additional District Judge, 7th Court, Barasat, North 24 Pgs. in MAT 20/2014 by which an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is disposed of. Admittedly, the husband/opposite party filed Matrimonial Suit No. 20 of 2014 against the Petitioner seeking the desolation of marriage by decree of divorce. It is alleged in the said plaint that the marriage was solemnized as per the Hindu rights and rituals on 26.06.2008 and thereafter the parties started living together as husband and wife at the matrimonial house. It is not in dispute that the son is born of the said wedlock and is currently in custody of the wife/opposite party. It is alleged in the plaint that the wife/opposite party started accusing the Petitioner on flimsy grounds and perpetrated cruelty on him for which it is impossible for the Petitioner to live together under one roof.

2. In the said suit, an application for maintenance is taken out by the wife alleging that the Petitioner being employed in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur earns Rs. 73,000/- per month as salary and further sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month from other business.

3. The Petitioner could not deny his employment with the bank but alleged that he gets a monthly salary of Rs. 16,000/- and odd. It is, further averred in the objection filed to the said application for maintenance that the wife has falsely made a complaint before the police authorities under section 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code, which is still pending. A proceeding under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is also filed by the wife/opposite party wherein the Petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 4,000/- to the wife and Rs. 2,000/- to the minor son on monthly basis. It is alleged that the wife is more interested in squeezing the money from the Petitioner.

4. The order passed in a proceeding under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was challenged before this Court in CRR 3134 of 2015 and was admitted on 18.11.2015. In the said order, it is recorded that the wife has also filed an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act wherein the Petitioner has been directed to pay the interim maintenance at Rs. 8,000/- per month in addition to the maintenance awarded in a proceeding under section 125 of the Cr.PC. By way of an interim order, the Court directed the maintenance to be paid by the husband/Petitioner under section 125 of the Cr.PC shall be inclusive of the interim maintenance awarded under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and directed the matter to appear as contested application. The Petitioner also challenged the order of interim maintenance passed on an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act before this Court in CO. 435 of 2015. The said application was rejected on 16.02.2015 with the categorical findings that the Petitioner has concealed the actual income and there is no difficulty in drawing an adverse inference.

5. The said order was challenged before the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal No. 14793 of 2015 which was also dismissed with the observations that the application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is yet to be disposed of and the challenge before the Supreme Court was against the interim order. However, the liberty was granted to the Petitioner to raise all the points including that the maintenance already allowed to the wife under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, should be inclusive of the maintenance granted under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act or not.

6. Subsequently, the application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was taken up by the Trial Court and by the impugned order the Trial Court directed the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- to the wife/opposite party and Rs. 2,000/- to the son on monthly basis in. addition to the maintenance granted in a proceeding