SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Cal) 307

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Shampa Sarkar, J.
Madhu Singh - Appellant
Versus
Jay Shankar Singh - Respondent
C.O. 4106 of 2019
Decided On : 09-01-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Tanmay Mukherjee, Mr. Anirudha Poddar, Mr. Shashwat Nayak, Mr. Mukesh Kr. Pandey. For the Appellant, for the Appellant; -, for the Respondent

The obligation of the husband to maintain the wife and children, referencing the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and the clarification that maintenance should be awarded from the date of filing the application, not from the date of the order.

Headnote:

Maintenance - Matrimonial Suit - Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act - [Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act] - The court set aside the maintenance order and directed a fresh hearing, emphasizing the need for evidence and documents to ascertain the financial conditions of both parties. The court also highlighted the obligation of the husband to maintain the wife and children, referencing the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The court clarified that maintenance should be awarded from the date of filing the application, not from the date of the order, citing the case of Jasbir Kaur Sehgal (Smt) vs. District Judge, Dehradun & ors. (1997) 7 SCC 7.

Fact of the Case:

The respondent filed a revisional application against the order awarding maintenance pendente lite to the wife and minor children in a matrimonial suit. The petitioner contended that the awarded amount was excessively low and did not consider the husband's financial status.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was insufficient evidence to assess the financial conditions of both parties and set aside the maintenance order. It directed a fresh hearing, emphasizing the need for evidence and documents to ascertain the financial conditions of both parties. The court also clarified the obligation of the husband to maintain the wife and children, referencing the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

Issues: Insufficient evidence to assess the financial conditions of both parties, adequacy of the awarded maintenance amount, and the date from which maintenance should be awarded.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for evidence and documents to ascertain the financial conditions of both parties. It clarified that maintenance should be awarded from the date of filing the application, not from the date of the order, citing the case of Jasbir Kaur Sehgal (Smt) vs. District Judge, Dehradun & ors. (1997) 7 SCC 7.

Final Decision: The revisional application was allowed, and the maintenance order was set aside. The court directed a fresh hearing and instructed the husband to pay a specified amount monthly until the new decision.

JUDGMENT

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is taken on record. The opposite party has been served. Delivery of the postal article is confirmed. This revisional application has been filed by the respondent in Matrimonial Suit No. 208 of 2018 pending before the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court at Durgapur. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated August 31, 2019 by which maintenance pendente lite of Rs.2,000/- per month for the wife and Rs.3,000/- per month for the minor children has been awarded by the learned court below.

2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the amount awarded for the two children and the petitioner is excessively low, inasmuch as, the school expenses of the children is itself beyond Rs.5,000/- each. It is further contended that the amount of maintenance has been awarded from the date of the order instead of the date of the application. Mr. Mukherjee contends that the learned court below did not take into account the status of the husband as also the income of the husband, vis--vis, the pleadings in the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It has been specifically averred in the said application that the husband had 12 bighas of land which was being cultivated and he owned 4.5 cottahs of land as also a Fiat car, a motor cycle and a Scooty. This according to Mr. Mukherjee, was the standard to which the wife was used to and she and her children deserved a living condition akin to the husband as has been disclosed in her application.

3. I have gone through the pleadings as also the impugned order, and I find that the learned court below came to a conclusion that the husband was an employee of Durgapur Transport Care Corporation earning salary of Rs.10,500/- per month. The learned court also held that the petitioner failed to prove her expenses as also the expenses of the children. No document was forthcoming from her side to show that the husband was cultivating on 12 bighas of land and earning therefrom. The husbands income was accepted to be Rs.10,500/- per month by the learned court below in the absence of any other document produced in support of the contention of the wife.

4. Having considered the various aspects in this case, I find that the husband proved his income on the basis of a letter or a certificate issued by the employer. No documents were produced before the learned court below with regard to the income tax returns, bank statements etc., from which the financial condition of the husband could be ascertained. It is also true that the wife failed to produce any document to indicate her expenses and the minimum amount of money that would be required for sustenance of the wife and the two children in the same standard to which they were used to before the separation.

5. I do not find that there is any evidence on record on the basis of which the monthly expenses of the wife and the children could be assessed. I also do not find any evidence on record which would show the financial condition of the husband. A complete reliance on the certificate may not be a conclusive decision as to the income of the husband.

6. Under such circumstances, the order dated August 31, 2019 is set aside with a direction upon the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court at Durgapur to hear the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the wife, afresh upon allowing the parties to adduce evidence and prove the documents and also file additional documents in support of their contentions and depose in support thereof. Upon considering the evidence on record as also the oral evidence, the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act should be disposed of in accordance with law. In the meantime, the husband will pay an amount of Rs.5000/- every month beginning January, 2020 within 15 of every month till the application under Section 24 is disposed of by the learned court below. Such amount will be adjusted with the amount as will b

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top