Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
K.R.MOHAPATRA
Hemanta Kumar Ray – Appellant
Versus
Romani Das @ Ray – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. maintenance payment details and parties' qualifications. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's analysis on maintenance necessity. (Para 4 , 7 , 9) |
| 3. opposite party's claim for increased maintenance. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. assessment of maintenance sufficiency. (Para 8) |
| 5. court's order for fresh adjudication. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
3. Ms. Naidu, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that relationship between the parties is not disputed. It is also not disputed that the Petitioner is working as Senior Geologist in ONGC and posted at Ahemadabad. The Opposite Party No.1 is also highly qualified lady. Monthly gross salary of the Petitioner at the relevant time was Rs.1,95,633/-. After deduction, take home salary of the Petitioner was Rs.50,793/- per month. The Petitioner is serving at Ahemadabad, where the cost of living is very high. Though the Opposite Party No.1 is a working lady, but unfortunately the Petitioner could not lead evidence to that effect as he could not collect material to that effect. The Petitioner has other responsibilities to discharge. Civil Proceeding No. 279 of 2021 filed by the Petitioner is pending before le
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
