IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH ON THE 9^th OF JULY, 2024 MISC. PETITION No. 4385 of 2023 (SUVEECHI CHAUDHARY Vs DR. AMBUJ CHAUDHARY AND OTHERS)

Appearance:

(SHRI MANU MAHESHWARI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER)

(SHRI VIVEK DALAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT [R-1].

ORDER

This miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 19.07.2023 passed by 3^rd Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore in RCSM No.151/2021 by which the trial court has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner and respondent no.1 are husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 26.11.1992 as per Hindu rituals and customs. Petitioner and respondent were blessed with a daughter on 8.10.1993 out of their wedlock who is working aboard after completion of her education.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR

3. Respondent No.1 filed a divorce petition under section 13- 1(9i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and adultery against the petitioner.

4. During the pendency of the divorce petition petitioner/wife filed an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking grant of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses and pleaded that respondent/husband is having status as Director, Cardiac Surgery at Fortis Mohali and has got multiple source of income besides professional fee. Out of sheer vendetta and vengeance he has initiated litigation before Chandigarh courts fully knowing that respondent is at present at Indore having no source of income. Being daughter of an eminent politician, wife of an eminent surgeon and a social entrepreneur she is accustomed to a particular way of living from which she has been deprived by the petitioner now. Respondent/wife is having no mode of transport. She has to depend upon the taxis. She requires befitting residential accommodation i.e. shelter as at present she is availing the facilities of PG. She has no source of income.

5. On the other hand, respondent earns Rs.9 lakhs per month. Hence, prayed that maintenance of Rs.5 lakhs per month i.e. at least half of the professional charges which are being credited every month in the bank account of the petitioner to enable the applicant to live with honor, dignity and grace according to her social status and parental family member circle and to meet with all the necessities of the life and pursue her social services, be granted besides litigation expenses to the extent of Rs.10 lakhs as only hopping flight is available from Indore to Delhi and Delhi to Chandigarh and the fair Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR is not less than Rs.20,000/- to 25,000/- to and fro as this vexatious litigation has been thrusted upon applicant wife and she has to commute from Gurgaon and Madhya Pradesh. Besides availing the facilities of hopping flight from Indore to Delhi and Delhi to Chandigarh, one has to stay overnight at Delhi and the cost of the hotel for the stay also varies approximately between Rs.5000 and Rs.10,000/- per day.

6. Respondent/husband filed the reply before the trial court and submitted that the petitioner is an earning lady and gets Rs.60,000/- per month and having property worth Rs.1 crore and having share valued at Rs.76 lakhs and she is living in adultery. So she is not entitled to get any interim maintenance.

7. After hearing counsel for both parties, trial Court has rejected the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has her own income and file income tax return and also investing huge amount of money in shares and she is getting huge returns as well which sufficient for her maintenance and she is residing at Jhira Bagh palace at Dhar. She has sufficient means of living.

8. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, petitioner