60. cra 75.22.doc

Urmila Ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 75 OF 2022

Mr. Gautam Shrirang Waghmare

.. Applicant

vs.

Mrs. Sushma Gautam Waghmare

..Respondent

Mr. Anil N. Jadhav, for Applicant.

None for the Respondent.

CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

DATE : OCTOBER 14, 2022

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant. The

challenge in this civil revision application filed under section

115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is to an order

dated 15/09/2021 passed by the 4^th Family Court, Pune.

2.

The Family Court by the impugned order passed

under Exhibit 21 granted maintenance of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.

5,000/- to the wife and Rs. 5,000/- to the minor son till he

attains majority). It is the contention of the learned

counsel for the applicant that the husband is working as a

1

URMILA

PRAMOD

INGALE

Digitally

signed by

URMILA

PRAMOD

INGALE

Date:

2022.10.17

20:12:58

+0530

60. cra 75.22.doc

staff driver in the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation

Department and drawing monthly basic salary of Rs.

32,000/- with total emoluments of Rs. 54,510/-. It is

submitted that after deductions, he is left with only an

amount of Rs. 24,874/-. He submitted that the applicant’s

mother is aged and he has to look after her. Moreover, it is

submitted that the applicant is taking care of educational

expenses of the minor son. Learned counsel submitted that

if an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month is deducted, there is

hardly any amount left for the applicant to pay for his

expenses. According to learned counsel, all these factors

have not been taken into consideration by the trial Court.

Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent-wife

is working and earning well. He submits that this civil

revision application should be proceeded exparte against

the respondent as despite notice, she had not appeared.

3.

I have gone through the impugned order. I have

gone through the salary slip of the husband for the month

of September 2022. From the total emoluments of

Rs.54510/-, an amount of Rs.20,500/- is being deducted

2

60. cra 75.22.doc

which is towards the housing loan that the applicant had

taken. The amount of Rs.2,000/- and an amount of

Rs.6,575/- is deducted towards GPF. Total recovery is

shown as Rs.9,136/-. There is nothing on record to indicate

as to how much the wife is earning. It is only stated that

she is working and getting salary.

4.

The trial Court, after considering the entire materials

on record and the pay slip produced, was of the opinion that

the net salary of the applicant comes to around Rs.32,666/-

per month, 1/3rd of which comes to around Rs.10,000/-.

The trial Court has taken into consideration that the

respondent-wife suppressed the material information about

her expenses and income. The trial Court took into

consideration the fact that the applicant has paid for the

school fees of their son and therefore passed an order for

payment of maintenance only from the date of the order i.e.

15/09/2001. This was so ordered to wash out the

possibility of adjusting the amount already paid by the

applicant for the maintenance of the respondent and their

son. It is further observed that the applicant failed to prove

3

60. cra 75.22.doc

that at present the respondent is gainfully employed. Even

now there is no material on record to show that the

respondent is gainfully employed. The trial Court has also

observed that as the respondent is quite qualified and found

her able to earn, granted maintenance of only of Rs.5,000/-

to her.

5.

Taking an overall view of the matter, I do not find any

perversity in the view taken by the trial Court granting

maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the wife and minor child.

The civil revision application is dismissed.

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

4