Ad-interim maintenance may be granted based on admitted income to prevent financial hardship, even if complete financial disclosure is lacking during preliminary hearings.

JUDGMENT :

SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. By way of this revision petition, the petitioner-husband seeks setting aside of the order dated 22.12.2023 [hereafter "impugned order‟] passed by the learned Judge, Family Courts, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi [hereafter "Family Court‟] in Mt. Case No. 682/2023.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and the respondent had got married to each other on 18.11.2021 at Noida, Uttar Pradesh, and their marriage was registered on 29.11.2021. It is stated that subsequently, on 02.01.2022, both parties travelled to Dubai. It is the case of the respondent-wife that since the beginning of the marital relationship, she was ill-treated and harassed, both physically and mentally, for demand of dowry. She also alleged that in Dubai, the petitioner and his mother had attempted to throw her off the building, however, she had somehow managed to save herself. Thereafter, she returned to India. Eventually, the present application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereafter "Cr.P.C.‟], seeking monthly maintenance of Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioner, was filed in November, 2023. Along with the said application, an interim maintenance application was also filed, seeking Rs.2,00,000/- per month during the pendency of the proceedings.

3. The learned Family Court, after hearing both the parties, passed the impugned order dated 22.12.2023, granting ad-interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month to the respondent-wife.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-husband has assailed the impugned order, contending that it is legally unsustainable and factually perverse. It is submitted that the learned Family Court erred in granting ad interim maintenance to the respondent-wife without affording the petitioner an effective opportunity to be heard or allowing him to file a reply. The order was passed on the very first date of appearance, without calling for affidavits of income, assets, and liabilities from both parties, as mandated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is further contended that the respondent-wife is residing separately at her parental home in Noida of her own volition, without any sufficient reason. She continues to hold possession of the keys to the Gurugram residence belonging to the petitioner's mother, which sindicates that she was not compelled to leave the matrimonial home. The learned Family Court, it is submitted, failed to consider the aspect of desertion by the respondent-wife. The learned counsel has also argued that the respondent is professionally qualified, having completed her Bachelor's degree in Physiotherapy and then pursued her Master's degree. It is submitted that the respondent is employed at a private clinic and drawing a decent income, yet no inquiry was made by the learned Family Court to ascertain her earnings before awarding a substantial amount of ad interim maintenance. It is further contended that the petitioner-husband, working in Dubai as a Software Engineer, earns around AED 20,000 per month, but incurs monthly expenses of approximately AED 16,500 due to the high cost of living. Additionally, his father, mother, and grandmother are fully dependent on him for their medical and daily expenses. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned order was passed in haste, without a fair evaluation of the petitioner's financial constraints or the respondent's earning capacity. In addition, it is also argued on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent herein