SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Del) 197

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
ANNURITA VOHRA – Appellant
Versus
SANDEEP VOHRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AVTAR SINGH, GITA LUTHRA, SANJIV SAHAY, SUDARSHAN RAJAN

VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against the Order dated 20. 8. 2001 whereby the Additional District Judge had granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per month to the Petitioner/applicant/wife for herself and her minor children. The Court had come to the conclusion that the net disposable income of the Respondent/husband is about Rs. 32,000/- per month which is exclusive of his perks and reimbursements. It had also been found that there were no dependents other than the wife and children. In Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge, Dehradun and others, (1997) 7 SCC 7, it has been observed that -

"no set formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance. It has, in the very nature of things, to depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. Some scope for leverage can, however, be always there. The court has to consider the status of the parties, their respective needs, the capacity of the husband to pay having regard to his reasonable expenses for his own maintenance and of those he is obliged under the law and statutory but involuntary payments or deductions. The amount of maintenance fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in r







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top