Back
2017 Supreme(UK) 229
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Rajiv Sharma, Sharad Kumar Sharma, JJ.
Smt. Reshu Dudeja and Another – Appellants
Versus
Deepak Dudeja – Respondent
Appeal from Order Nos. 122 & 127 of 2017
Decided On : 18-07-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. Neeraj Garg.
For the Respondent: Mr. Piyush Garg.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the maintenance amount under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act should be determined based on the husband's income and standard of living, ensuring the wife's reasonable comfort and ability to pursue her case.
Headnote:
Maintenance - Hindu Marriage Act - Section 24
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the maintenance amount to be granted to the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The husband filed for dissolution of marriage on grounds of desertion and cruelty, while the wife sought pendente lite maintenance and litigation expenses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the maintenance amount awarded by the lower court was inadequate considering the husband's income and standard of living. It also emphasized that the wife's ability to survive for ten years did not extinguish her need for maintenance.
Issues: The main issue was the determination of the appropriate maintenance amount for the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the maintenance amount should be commensurate with the husband's income and standard of living, ensuring that the wife can live in reasonable comfort and pursue her case without feeling handicapped.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, enhancing the maintenance amount from Rs. 25,000/- p.m. to Rs. 45,000/- p.m. and increasing the litigation expenses from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 30,000/-. It also directed the Family Court to decide the initial Suit within six months.
Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
1. These are the two appeals. Appeal No. 127 of 2017 is preferred by the wife, Smt. Reshu Dudeja whereas, Appeal No. 122 is preferred by the husband, Deepak Dudeja. For the purposes of convenience, Appeal No. 127 of 2017 is taken as a leading appeal.
2. In the principal Suit, being Suit No. 42 of 2015, Sri Deepak Dudeja vs. Smt. Reshu Batra, where an issue with regard to the dissolution of marriage between the parties to the Suit as held on 5th January, 2000, is a subject matter of consideration.
3. It was pleaded in the suit that as a consequence of the marriage and the relationship between the husband and wife, the appellant No. 2, i.e. son Manav Dudeja was born on 26th May, 2001. At the time, when the controversy arose, the son Manav Dudeja was studying in a School at Dehradun called as Doon International School and was a student of Class-X.
4. Primarily, the suit for dissolution of marriage was filed by Deepak Dudeja, on the ground of desertion and cruelty. Although, some of the grounds which has been taken in the principal Suit has also been pleaded in the application filed by the defendant appellant under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Court below, but since the intricacies of the pleadings between the parties to the suit is yet to undergo the test of evidence and findings are yet to be given by the Court after appreciating respective evidence, on the basis of the respective pleadings, it would not be appropriate to record any evidence or consider any pleadings of the parties at this stage when the controversy is confined to its consideration on an application under Section 24 of the Act. As such, any finding recorded touching the cruelty and desertion will have a bearing on the principal suit. Thus, Court refrains itself from recording any finding on the same. While the suit was pending, the opposite party had filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, being paper No. 31-A, seeking pendente lite maintenance and litigation expenses.
5. In those proceedings, under Section 24, it is an admitted case that the instant marriage was the second marriage as both the appellant and respondent were earlier divorced. In application under Section 24, the case of the respondent was that she has got no source of earning and since she has to meet her day-to-day requirement also, coupled with the fact that she has to maintain the child who is student of Class-X and gradually since he is on growing stage, she needs to meet the family liability. In the absence of any source of income, there is dearth of money with the wife.
6. In the application, thus, filed she contended that the plaintiff to the suit and appellant, herein, is a person of an affluent means because he owns two big companies whose offices are situated at Signapore and Regional Office at Noida. She contended that the two companies which the appellant has, namely, C.I.D. Machines P.T.I. Limited, having its Head Office at Singapore, is turn over of Rs. 5 crores to 25 crores and Unishurtus Machines Pvt. Ltd. which is a private limited company, and is manufacturer of P.C.B. Assembly Machines, etc. which has got its Head Office, at Greater Noida and have a sufficient turn over.
7. She further contended in support of pleading for the application under Section 24 that the husband has also got immovable property at various places. She also pleaded that the appellant has got three cars, namely, Fortuner, Honda City and Maruti Alto.
8. Looking to the aforesaid backdrop, she stated that he has got sufficient income and it would be deemed that the standard of living of the appellant was of higher level. Hence, under Section 24, she was entitled for a maintenance, which would be sufficient to maintain the standard of living of the wife compatible to the standard of living of the husband. Hence, under the aforesaid backdrop, the respondent claimed that she may be granted a pendente lite maintenance @ Rs. 1 crore p.m. and a l
