1. This revision is directed against the order dated 25-10-1993 passed below an application for interim maintenance under Section 20 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1965 (1955) in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 6 of 1991 passed by the learned 4th Extra Assistant Judge, Baroda by invoking provisions of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code).
2. The respondent is the husband who filed above suit against the petitioner-original defendant-wife for dissolution of marriage. The wife during the course of the proceedings in the said suit, preferred an application Ex. 7 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for alimony and expenses of the litigation on 7-2-1991, inter alia, contending that she has no independent means of source for her maintenance and litigation, whereas her husband is earning an amount more than Rs. 1,000/- by way of pension. The husband appeared and resisted the claim for interim maintenance. After considering the facts and circumstances, the trial Court found that the original applicant-wife has no independent source of income and she is entitled to maintenance. This application Ex. 7 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for interim maintenance came to be partly allowed. The respondent-husband is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 300/- per month by way of interim maintenance to the respondent-wife from the date of the order which came to be passed on 25th October 1993.
3. The wife being dissatisfied with the quantum of interim maintenance and non-awarding of amount for the expenditure of litigation has preferred this revision.
4. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the spouses and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the amount of interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month from the husband to the wife from the date of passing of the order is required to be modified. There is no reason whatsoever stated in the impugned order as to why the amount towards interim maintenance is not awarded from the date of the application which came to be preferred on 27-4-1994 before the trial Court. No doubt, fixing of the amount and quantum of interim maintenance is in the discretion of the trial Court. However, ordinarily, the amount of maintenance is required to be awarded from the date of the application but is not from the date of receipt of summons of the suit against the wife, by the respondent. In absence of any reasons whasoever for not awarding amount of interim maintenance from the date of the application, this Court is unable to uphold it, in view of the decision of this Court in Janakbhai H. Ladawa v. Bhavnaben . The learned Extra
Assistant Judge ought to have granted interim maintenance from the date of the application or atleast reasons for not granting it. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the wife is entitled to get interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- (Rupees three hundred only) from the date of the application like that from 7-1-1991 instead of 25th October 1993. The trial Court has also not awarded any amount for litigation expenses. Thus, when once having found that the wife is entitled to maintenance for herself and has no independent source of income, the Court ought to have awarded the reasonable amount for meeting with the litigation expenses in which the wife is the defendant. Under the circumstances, it would be just and reasonable to award an amount of Rs, 750/- (Rupees seven hundred fifty only) towards the litigation expenses. Accordingly, the respondent-original plaintiff-husband is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 750/- towards litigation expenses to the appellant-original defendant-wife. In so far as fixing of the quantum of interim maintenance is concerned, it cannot be said to be grossly inadequate or insufficient in the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore, in so far as that part of the order is concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. In this connection, it may be noted that while fixing interim maintenance, the trial Court has not considered that the husband was earning an amount of Rs. 1,534/-. Having examined tenure of the impugned order, it appears that the trial Court has considered the admitted income of the husband and has not considered the income of Rs. 1,534/- disclosed in Purshis filed on behalf of the husband. Had that amount been considered, the quantum of interim maintenance would not have been much more or higher. The fact that the amount could have been awarded little more. However, that counting by itself is not sufficient to interfere with the discretion of the trial Court in fixing of the interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this revision filed by the wife is partly allowed. Interim maintenance awarded to the wife at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month is directed to be given from the date of the application like that from 7-2-1991 instead from the date of passing of the impugned order. The opponent-original plaintiff-husband is also directed to pay an amount of Rs. 750/- (Rupees seven hundred fifty only) towards litigation expenses of the Original defendant-wife.
6. With this observation and modification as aforesaid, this petition is partly alloweo, with no order as to costs. The impugned order shall stand modified accordingly.
No comments:
Post a Comment