Husband held liable for payment of maintenance to wife and children.

1. This revision has been preferred under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the order of the learned 2nd Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai, dated 9.5.2001 passed in I.A. No.506 of 1997 in O.P. No.632 of 1996.

2. Heard Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan, learned senior counsel for Mr.R.Srinivasan, appearing for the petitioner and Ms.Sheela Jayaprakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. With the consent of counsel for either side, the revision itself is taken up for final disposal.

3. The revision petitioner is the husband and the respondent is his wife. The petitioner and the respondent got married on 2.5.85 at Madras. During the said marital life, they have begotten two daughters, namely, Minor Niraja and Minor Sahana respectively aged 9 and 7 years.

4. The husband instituted O.P. No.632 of 1996 against the wife for dissolution of marriage on the allegation that the wife was living in adultery, besides on the ground of cruelty. We are not concerned with the merits of the said divorce petition or the defence raised in the original petition.

5. During the pendency of the said original petition, the wife moved I.A. No.506 of 1997 under Section 24 and 26 of The Hindu Marriage Act for a direction to pay maintenance for herself and the two minor daughters and for their educational expenses, litigation expenses and travel and accommodation expenses. According to the wife, the husband is well placed in life, that he is a partner in VVD & Sons and various other establishments and his monthly income is not less than Rs.2 lakhs. According to the husband, the wife is having her own source of income of not less than Rs.1.30 lakhs every year and, therefore, she is not entitled to claim any maintenance.

6. In the said application, the Court below framed the following two points for consideration :-

"i) Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim interim maintenance against the respondent for herself and children and if so, what is the quantum ? ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to claim litigation expenses as claimed under the petition and whether the petitioner is entitled to receive travel and accommodation expenses as stated in the petition ?"

7. The family court by fair and decretal order dated 9.5.2001 directed payment of Rs.20,000 to the wife and two minor daughters from 5.9.96, the date of the petition with a direction to deduct expenses incurred by the husband for the education of the daughters, to pay Rs. 10,000 towards litigation expenses and Rs.50,000 towards travel and accommodation expenses. Challenging the said finding and the directions issued, the present revision has been filed by the husband under Article 227 of The Constitution.

8. According to the husband, the conclusion of the Family Court is erroneous in law and vitiated by wrongful exercise of jurisdiction, besides resulted in manifest injustice. It is further contended that disregarding the materials and evidence, the Family Court awarded huge sum towards maintenance, while the wife herself is an income tax assessee and huge investments and deposits and shares stands in her name apart from herself being a trustee in a private trust. It is contended that the Family Court has surmised and dwelled in conjectures. It is further contended that the family court had failed to advert and consider the material documents produced by the husband to show that the wife is well placed, she is an income tax assessee and she has sufficient income of her own to maintain herself. It was also contended that though an additional affidavit has been filed and documents have been produced, the same had neither been adverted to nor had been taken into consideration by the Family Court Judge.

9. Per contra, Ms.Sheela Jayaprakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent contended that no interference is called for with the order passed by the family court awarding maintenance and directing payment towards travelling expenses, litigation expenses, etc.