C.R.P(PD)No. 3157 of 2018

and C.M.P.No. 18100 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.09.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

C.R.P(PD).No. 3157 of 2018

and

C.M.P.No. 18100 of 2018

Vijay Babu

...Petitioner

Vs.

Primiya

..Respondent

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India, against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.168 of 2016 in

H.M.O.P.No. 99 of 2016 dated 20.09.2017 on the file of the learned

Principal Sub-Court, Mayiladuthurai.

For Petitioner

: Mr.T.Sundaravadanam

For Respondent

: Mr.Harikrishnan for

M/s. K.M.Vijayan Associates

O R D E R

The husband, who suffered an order for payment of interim

maintanance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month passed in I.A.No.168 of

2016 in H.M.O.P.No.99 of 2016 has come up with this civil revision

1/4

http://www.judis.nic.in

C.R.P(PD)No. 3157 of 2018

and C.M.P.No. 18100 of 2018

petition.

2. The H.M.O.P.No. 99 of 2016 has been filed by the husband

seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Pending the divorce petition, the wife filed I.A.No.168 of 2016 seeking

interim maintanance at a rate of Rs.5,000/- for herself and Rs.5000/- for her

child.

3. The said application was resisted by the husband contending

that the petitioner is not entitled to maintanance as she had volutarily left

the matrimonial home. It was also pointed out that the petitioner / husband

is not earning Rs.25,000/- per month as alleged and he is only getting a

meagre amount as salary. The Trial Court considered the respective

pleadings and awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month as interim

maintenance and awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- toward litigation expenses.

4. I have heard Mr.T.Sundaravadanam, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr.Harikrishnan for K.M.Vijayan Associates for the

respondent.

2/4

http://www.judis.nic.in

C.R.P(PD)No. 3157 of 2018

and C.M.P.No. 18100 of 2018

5. Mr.T.Sundaravadanam, learned counsel for the petitioner would

vehemently contend that in the absence of any proof regarding the earning

of the husband, the Trial Judge was not right in fixing a sum of Rs.5,000/-

as maintenance. He would also contend that the petitioner / wife left the

matrimonial home on her own volition and therefore, she is not entitled to

maintenance. The petition for divorce filed by the husband is on the ground

of cruelty. The wife is resisting the same reason on several grounds. The

petitioner / husband is liable to maintain wife. The fact that there is no

evidence aduced by the wife to show the income of the husband can not be a

ground to deny maintanance. Considering the current cost of living and

standard of living of the husbsnd, the Trial Court fixed a sum of Rs.5,000/-

per month as maintenance. I do not see any reason to interfere with the said

fixation. Therefore, this civil revision petition fails and it is accordingly

dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No

costs.

30.09.2020

3/4

http://www.judis.nic.in

C.R.P(PD)No. 3157 of 2018

and C.M.P.No. 18100 of 2018

kkn

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

KKN

To:

The learned Principal Sub-Court,

Mayiladuthurai.

C.R.P(PD).No. 3157 of 2018

and

C.M.P.No. 18100 of 2018

30.09.2020

4/4

http://www.judis.nic.in