IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Prem Narayan Singh, J.
Shikha (Smt.) v. Avaneesh Mahodaya
Criminal Revision No. 3028 of 2019 and 3931 of 2022 (I); Decided on 10.9.2024*
Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 125 -- maintenance -- both husband and wife residing at Dubai -- actual monthly income of husband assessed as Rs. 2 to 2.50 lacs -- wife also well-educated lady -- earns nearly about Rs. 75,000/- per month -- maintenance amount of Rs. 60,000/- per month on higher side -- reduced to Rs. 40,000/- per month. AIR 1997 SC 3397, AIR 2015 SC 2025 and AIR 2017 SC 2383 followed. 2020 Law Suit (MP) 1098 and Cr. R. No. 4004 of 2019 decided on 22.8.2023 relied on. [Paras 10 & 14 to 16]
naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 125 & Òj.ki¨"k.k & ifr rFkk iRuh] n¨u¨a nqcà esa fuokljr & ifr dh okLrfod ekfld vk; #i;s n¨ ls ढkà yk[k fuèkkZfjr & iRuh Òh lqf’kf{kr efgyk & yxÒx #i;s 75]000@& dk ekfld miktZu & #i;s 60]000@& çfrekl dh Òj.ki¨"k.k jde vfèkd & ÄVkdj #i;s 40]000@& çfrekl dh xÃA ,vkbvkj 1997 ,llh 3397] ,vkbvkj 2015 ,llh 2025 rFkk ,vkbvkj 2017 ,llh 2383 vuqlfjrA 2020 ykW lwV ¼,eih½ 1098 rFkk nkafMd iqujh{k.k Øekad 4004 lu~ 2019 fu.kÊr fnukad 22-8-2023 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 10 ,oa 14 ls 16½
ORDER
1. Both the Criminal Revisions are arising out of the same order and hence both the revisions are being heard and decided with this common order analogously.
2. These criminal revisions have been preferred under section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, r/w S. 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. by the the Husband and Wife respectively being aggrieved by the order dated 15.5.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore in M.Cr.C No.295/2015 whereby learned Principal Judge allowed the application under section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by the wife by directing the husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs.60,000/- to the wife, per month.
3. Brief facts of the case are that, the wife has filed an application under section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Indore seeking maintenance from the husband. As per her application, she got married with her husband by Hindu rights and rituals on 27.11.2023. She stayed with her husband and her in-laws at Pune, Abu-Dhabi and Dubai, wherein she was performing her duty as an ideal wife and always taken care of her husband and his family members. It has been alleged in the application that the husband has not taken care of her and used to harass her physically and mentally. In the year 2006 wife got pregnant and at that time also the petitioner used to harass her and subjected her to perform heavy house hold work due to which she suffered a miscarriage. She was continuously subjected to torture due to which many a times she was compelled to stay at her maternal house. Husband has also refused to take her to Dubai so also he threatened her to kill if she comes to Dubai, Thereafter, she started residing in her maternal house. It is further alleged in the application that the husband is working as vice president in Citi Bank, Dubai and earning 1,60,000 Diram per annum i.e. 13,333/- Diram per month and in addition to that income he earns Rs.50,000/-, hence in order to live a life in accordance with standard of living of her husband, she filed an application under section 125 of Cr.P.C seeking maintenance of Rs.60,000/- per month. 2 CRR-3028-2019
4. The aforesaid facts were denied by the husband in his reply to the application by stating that the wife is living separately from the husband without any sufficient cause. She used to doubt about the character of her husband and used to create disputes with him. Wife is a well educated lady employed in a Bank at Dubai and used to earn AED 3500/- (Rs.75000/- in Indian Currency) per month. At Indore also she was earning Rs.50,000/- by running a coaching center and beauty parlour. The wife is unnecessarily threatening the husband to rope him in false cases, while leaving her matrimonial house. The husband has the responsibility of his parents who are aged about 80 years hence she is not entitled for any maintenance.
5. Learned trial Court, on due consideration of the evidence adduced by the parties, allowed the application vide the impugned order and awarded monthly maintenance of Rs.60000/- per month to the wife from the date of the order. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment parties have preferred this revision petitions.
6. Learned counsel for the wife has pleaded in his argument that the learned Family Court has passed the order only on the basis of husband's averments, the trial Court did not pay any heed on the evidence available on record. As per salary certificate (June 2018) of husband (Ex. D/7) the husband is receiving total salary of 35364/- Diram per month and after deduction of house rent allowance and other allowances he is receiving 19834/- Diram and he is also entitled for the rental allowance of 15,500/- Diram out of which he was paying only 6000 Dirams as house rent and 9000 Diram was his savings which fact the trial Court has ignored while awarding maintenance. In addition he is earning Rs.50000/- as rental income from his houses at Pune and Andheri, Mumbai, therefore, considering all proper perspectives of ongoing expe
Maintenance – A well qualified spouses should not be left idle or to remain idle basing on their maintenance amount received from their husband.
The court emphasized that maintenance must reflect the financial status of both parties, ensuring the wife maintains a standard of living consistent with her marriage while considering her earning ca....
Point of law: Claim of maintenance by wife - Maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic, and avoid either of the two extremes i.e. maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be s....
(1) Income of spouse is one of prime considerations for determination of maintenance allowance to wife and children.(2) Husband cannot be permitted to ignore his responsibility for maintaining his di....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the husband to provide adequate financial support to his wife and children, considering their reasonable needs and the standard o....
Maintenance awarded from the date of application must be reasonable and realistic. Applying a uniform, static amount retrospectively over several years is inequitable if the respondent's income fluct....
The court affirmed that a spouse's educational qualifications do not disqualify them from receiving maintenance, emphasizing the need for a fair assessment of financial needs and obligations.
The court emphasized the husband’s duty to maintain an adequate standard of living for his ex-wife and child, reflective of his income and their necessities.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.