The central legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of income and quantum of maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in line with the objective of ensuring financial support during matrimonial proceedings.

Headnote:
Maintenance - Hindu Marriage Act,1955 - Section 24 - Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 125 - Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Hindu Maintenance and Adoption Act, 1956
Fact of the Case:

The husband appealed against an order directing him to pay maintenance to his wife and daughter under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The appellant claimed that the learned Family Judge erred in assessing his income and challenged the quantum of maintenance fixed by the court.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant's income was correctly assessed as Rs. 1,09,000/- per month based on his own documents. It also considered the expenses claimed by both parties and concluded that the maintenance awarded was not excessive.
Issues: The main issue was the assessment of the appellant's income and the quantum of maintenance for the wife and daughter.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the objective of Section 24 of the Act, which is to ensure that either party should not suffer due to paucity of a source of income during matrimonial proceedings. It also considered the provisions for maintenance under other Acts such as the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 125 and the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the maintenance awarded to the wife and daughter.

ORDER

Neena Bansal Krishna, J. (Oral). - CM APPL. 16706/2022 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application is disposed of.

MAT.APP. (F.C.) 38/2022 & CM APPL. 16705/2022 (stay)

1. The petitioner/ husband is aggrieved by the Order dated 21st, February, 2022 directing him to pay maintenance in the sum of Rs. 20,000/-per month to the respondent/wife and daughter Varnika Singh under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. Facts in brief are that appellant and respondent got married according to Hindu customs and rites on 24th February, 2011 in Ramgarh, Jharkhand and were blessed with a daughte February, 2015. The relationship between the parties deteriorated over a period of time, but the watershed moment came in their life in May, 2016, when the appellant came to know about the adulterous relationship of his wife, the respondent with her cousin brother. He left the matrimonial home on 22nd May, 2016 and shifted with his brother. The appellant/husband made a complaint dated 27th May, 2016 to SHO, PS Indirapuram about the adulterous acts of the respondent. Thereafter, he filed a Divorce Petition being HMA No.699 of 2016 (renumbered as HMA No.1089 of 2018) on the ground of cruelty and adultery which is pending adjudication before the Family Court, East, Karkardooma, Delhi.

3. The respondent, on the other hand, filed a complaint being CT No.59546 of 2016 under Section 12 of The Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which is pending adjudication before the Mahila Court, East, Karkardooma, Delhi. She has also filed a FIR No. 1151 of 2016 P.S. Indirapuram under Section 498A IPC.

4. The respondent in divorce petition, filed an application under Section 24 of the Act dated 24th January, 2017 claiming maintenance for herself and her daughter in the sum of Rs. 4I,000/- per month. The learned Judge, Family Court assessed the income of the appellant to be Rs. 1,09,000/- per month and granted a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per month as maintenance for the respondent and the daughter w.e.f the date of filing of the application till the date of disposal of the petition.

5. The appellant has challenged the Order on the ground that the Ld. Family Judge has erred in assessing the income of the appellant as Rs. 1,09,000/- per month. He had lost his job and is presently working as a freelance sales professional having an income of approximately Rs. 40,000/-per month. On the other hand, the respondent/wife is a highly educated woman and has been working in the past. She, in her Income-Expenditure affidavit dated 22nd January, 2022 has disclosed that she had been earning Rs.10,000 to 12,000/- per month till lockdown i.e., till March, 2020. In fact, the respondent has not disclosed her correct employment status.

6. Heard submissions.

7. Essentially the challenge in the present appeal is to the quantum of maintenance fixed by the learned Family Judge. Before venturing into the facts it may be appropriate to consider that the provision for maintenance has been made in various Acts. One of the earliest enactments is Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 125 of which provided for maintenance to wife, dependent children and parents upto Rs. 500/- per month though by Amendment Act 50 effective from 24th September 2001, the cap of Rs. 500/-has been removed. The reason for providing maintenance under Code of Criminal Procedure essentially was to address destitution and vagrancy which many a times, drives a person in desperation to commit crime. The objective was essentially to provide basic subsistence for survival as a preventive measure against commission of crime. The maintenance under Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is to give immediate succour to a women who is a victim of domestic violence. It is under Hindu Maintenance and Adoption Act, 1956 that the parties may establish their respective claims to maintenance according to their status after adducing evidence in a trial. T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document