Back
2018 Supreme(P&H) 4698
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Raj Mohan Singh, J.
Geetu - Appellant
Versus
Subhash Chander - Respondent
CR No. 4387 of 2018(O&M) and CR No. 3175 of 2018(O&M)
Decided On : 26-10-2018
Vijay Lath, Advocate, for the Appellant (CR No.4387 of 2018); Vijay Lath, Advocate, for the Respondent (CR No.3175 of 2018); Binat Sharma, Advocate, for the Appellant (CR No.3175 of 2018); Binat Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent (CR No.4387 of 2018)
The legal obligation of the husband to maintain his wife and minor son, and the consideration of earning capacity and qualifications in determining the maintenance amount.
Headnote:
Maintenance - Hindu Marriage Act - Section 13, Section 24, Section 125 Cr.P.C - The court discussed the provisions of Section 13 for dissolution of marriage, Section 24 for grant of maintenance pendente lite, and Section 125 Cr.P.C for maintenance to wife and minor son. The court emphasized the legal obligation of the husband to maintain his wife and minor son, and considered the earning capacity and qualifications of both parties in determining the maintenance amount.
Fact of the Case:
Husband filed for divorce and wife filed for maintenance pendente lite. Dispute over the income and earning capacity of both parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the husband had a legal obligation to maintain his wife and minor son, and enhanced the maintenance amount based on the need of the wife and minor son.
Issues: Dispute over income and earning capacity, obligation of husband to maintain wife and minor son.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the legal obligation of the husband to maintain his wife and minor son, and considered the earning capacity and qualifications of both parties in determining the maintenance amount.
Final Decision: The court enhanced the maintenance amount for the wife from Rs. 5000/- per month to Rs. 7000/- per month and awarded an amount of Rs. 3000/- per month to the minor son.
JUDGMENT
Raj Mohan Singh, J. - Vide this common order, CR No.4387 of 2018 titled Geetu v. Subhash Chander and CR No.3175 of 2018 titled Subhash Chander v. Geetu are being disposed of. Since both the revision petitions have arisen out of the same order, therefore, common facts are being noticed.
2. Both the revision petitions have been preferred against the order dated 19.03.2018 passed by Additional District Judge, Rupnagar.
3. Subhash Chander husband of Geetu filed a petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage of the parties by way of decree of divorce. An application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the wife (Geetu) for grant of maintenance pendente lite on behalf of herself as well as on behalf of minor son, besides litigation expenses. Wife claimed that husband is a man of sources who is serving as a Lecturer in Global College of Engineering and Technology at Khanpur Khuhi against a salary structure of Rs. 50,000/- per month. He also used to work in agriculture sector and his income is Rs. 1 lac per month from the said profession. On the other hand, wife has no moveable and immoveable property and has no source of income to maintain herself as well as minor son. She claimed maintenance pendente lite to the tune of Rs. 15,000/- per month for herself and Rs. 10,000/- per month to the minor son besides litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 30,000/-. Wife also submitted that the husband is a qualified person having qualification of M.Sc. Physics. The minor son is living with her.
4. The claim of the wife was contested by the husband on the ground that the wife is having sufficient source of income as she being M.A Hindi and B.Ed is doing job in SGTB Khalsa College, Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar in a salary structure of Rs. 20,000/-per month. Besides the aforesaid earning, she also used to earn from tuition work. Husband further stated that he has already left the job about 2 years back and is now doing nothing. He has denied his income as claimed by the wife.
5. Additional District Judge, Rupnagar held that in the absence of any material in respect of ascertaining income of both the parties, no firm finding can be recorded. However, husband is an able bodied person and therefore, he cannot escape from his liability for maintaining his wife. The factum of marriage is admitted between the parties. The minor son is in the custody of mother. Minor son is about 10 years of age and is studying in school. Additional District Judge, Rupnagar while passing the impugned order granted an amount of Rs. 5000/- per month as pendente lite to the wife from the date of application. An amount of Rs. 10,000/- was fixed towards litigation expenses. Against the impugned order dated 19.03.2018 passed by Additional District Judge, Rupnagar both the parties have come in revision petitions.
6. Learned counsel for the wife submitted that only an amount of Rs. 14,000/- has been paid by the husband towards arrears of maintenance till date and he preferred to go in civil imprisonment of three months instead of paying arrears of maintenance. An amount of Rs. 5000/- per month is nothing, but a meager amount so as to meet the day to day requirement of wife as well as minor son. Nothing has been awarded towards maintenance of the minor son.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the husband stated that due to constant bickering and quarrelsome nature of the wife, husband was made to leave the job and now he is sitting idle without any job to work and there is no source of income for paying any maintenance to the wife and the minor son.
8. During course of arguments, it has come to fore that husband is having qualification of M.Sc. Physics. Wife is having qualification of M.A Hindi and B.Ed. Admittedly, husband was working as Lecturer in Global College of Engineering and Technology at Khanpur Khuhi in a salary structure of Rs. 50,000/- per month. The husband is under legal obligation to maintain
