IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Shampa Sarkar, J.
Sri Subrata Roy - Appellant
Versus
Sushrita Roy - Respondent
C.O. 4267 of 2019
Decided On : 08-01-2020
Maintenance - Matrimonial Suit - Special Marriage Act - Section 36, Section 37 - Rajesh Burman v. Mitul Chatterjee (Burman) (2009) 1 SCC 398, Radhika Narang v. Karun Raj Narang (2009) 1 DMC 814 (Delhi), Soma Chowdhury (Sarkar) v. Pradip Kumar Chowdhury (2009) 1 CHN 282, Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge, Dehradun (1997) 7 SCC 7, Annurita Vohra v. Sandeep Vohra (2004) DLT 546, Dr. Kulbhushan Kunwar v. Raj Kumari AIR 1971 Supreme Court 234, Mangat Mal v. Punni Devi (1995) 6 SCC 88, Maharani Kesarkunverba v. I.T. Commissioner AIR 1960 Supreme Court 1343
Fact of the Case:
The husband filed an application in a matrimonial suit seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery. The court directed the husband to pay maintenance to the wife and child under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the husband failed to provide evidence to rebut the wife's claims about his income and did not prove that the maintenance amount was excessive. The court also considered the status of the wife and the daughter in awarding maintenance.
Issues: The issues involved the husband's obligation to pay maintenance despite the adultery claim and the determination of the appropriate maintenance amount.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various legal principles to determine maintenance, including the wide amplitude of 'maintenance' and 'support', the potentiality of income, the absence of rigid rules for maintenance calculation, and the need to consider the status and living conditions of the parties.
Final Decision: The revisional application was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
JUDGMENT
1. This is an application filed by the husband in Matrimonial Suit No. 496 of 2016 pending before the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court in Howrah.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated July 9, 2019 passed by the learned court below by which the learned court has directed the husband petitioner to pay Rs.15,000/- p.m. to the wife and the child from the date of filing of the application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act and also to pay a lump sum of Rs.15,000/- as litigation costs.
3. It is contended by the petitioner that the suit is for dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and as such the wife was not entitled to any maintenance. Rs.15,000/- was excessive, as an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- or more has already been withdrawn by the wife from the husbands bank account.
4. I have considered the order impugned and I find that the learned court has considered the monthly expenses of the daughter, who is a student of Class-VIII, by examining the fees structure etc. filed by the wife. The husband did not allege that the wife had any personal income. The husband is a Manager of HDFC Bank and earns Rs.55,000/- p.m. according to the wife. The husband/petitioner has failed to produce any document to show that his monthly income is less than Rs.55,000/-. Neither his income tax return nor his salary slip was filed for the court to rebut the contentions of the wife. As regards the withdrawal of Rs.1,00,000/- or more from the husbands bank account the learned court below held that the said point will be decided at the final hearing on trial.
5. It is also a fact that the wife is residing with her parents as a dependent and it is also stated in the application before the learned court below that the husband does not have any dependent.
6. In the absence of any proof to the contrary that the husband earns less amount than what the wife had stated before the learned court, the learned judge rightly directed payment of Rs.15,000/- per month towards maintenance of the daughter and the wife. The said amount is not excessive. The husband has not been able to show that his income was not sufficient in order to pay Rs.15,000/- to the wife.
7. It is also true that the said amount has been awarded keeping in view the status of the wife as the wife was living in her matrimonial home, being married to a manager of a well known Bank.
8. The expression 'maintenance' and 'support' had fallen for consideration in Rajesh Burman v. Mitul Chatterjee (Burman) reported in (2009) 1 SCC 398 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision considered Sections 36 and 37 of the Special Marriage Act and upon examination of the said two expressions 'maintenance' and 'support' it was held as follows:-
'25. Reading the scheme of the Act, it is clear that a wife is entitled to 'maintenance and support'. In our considered opinion, the learned counsel for the respondent wife is right in submitting that the two terms 'maintenance' and 'support' are comprehensive in nature and of wide amplitude.
26. The term 'maintenance' is defined in Black's Law Dictionary (6th Edn., pp.953-54) thus:
'The furnishing by one person to another, for his or her support, of the means of living, or food, clothing, shelter, etc. particularly where the legal relation of the parties is such that one is bound to support the other, as between father and child, or husband and wife.'
Likewise, the word 'support' as defined in the said dictionary (p.1439) reads as under:
'That which furnishes a livelihood; a source or means of living; subsistence, sustenance, maintenance, or living. In a broad sense the term includes all such means of living as would enable one to live in the degree of comfort, suitable and become to his station of life. It is said to include anything requisite of housing, feeding, clothing, health, proper recreation, vacation, travelling expense, or other proper cognate purposes; also, proper care, nursing, and medical attendanc
Annurita Vohra vs. Sandeep Vohra
Dr. Kulbhushan Kunwar vs. Raj Kumari
Jasbir Kaur Sehgal vs. District Judge, Dehradun
Maharani Kesarkunverba vs. I.T. Commissioner
Mt. Ekradeshwari vs. Homeshwar
Soma Chowdhury (Sarkar) vs. Pradip Kumar Chowdhury 2009 (1) CHN 282
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.