Madhya Pradesh High Court
Beerendra Kumar Pandey vs Urmila Dubey on 12 April, 2022
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
FA No. 791 of 2015
(BEERENDRA KUMAR PANDEY Vs URMILA DUBEY)
Dated : 12-04-2022
Mrs. Shobha Menon, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Rahul Choubey,
learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Vinay Singh Baghel, learned counsel for the respondent.
This First Appeal has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff/husband challenging the judgment and decree dated 20.08.2015 passed in Civil Suit No.7- A/2014, whereby Family Court, Singrauli has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Upon service of notice of the First Appeal, the respondent/wife filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings (I.A. No.15676/2016) on 21.11.2016 making demand of monthly maintenance of Rs.30,000/- and expenses of the proceedings Rs.50,000/-. By filing reply to the said application, the appellant/husband contended that he is having monthly income of Rs.12,000/- only and he has no other source of income and prayed for dismissal of the application.
Upon due consideration of contentions made by learned counsels of the rival parties, this Court vide order dated 29.01.2018 ordered to grant interim maintenance @ Rs.7,000/- per month to the respondent and her son and an amount of Rs.10,000/- was granted towards expenses of the proceedings. By this order, it was directed that the amount of maintenance shall be payable from the date of filing of the application i.e. 21.11.2016.
From bare perusal of the previous order sheets, it is clear that there is dispute about compliance of the said order dated 29.01.2018.
Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that because application for modification/recall of order dated 29.01.2018 (I.A. No.5864/2019) is still pending, therefore, the appellant be granted time to comply the last order dated 04.04.2022 and prays to decide the I.A. No.5864/2019 first. Signature SAN Verified Not Learned senior counsel submits that the appellant is taking care of his son Digitally signed by SWETA SAHU and already paying the education fees and is bearing all the expenses regarding his Date: 2022.04.13 14:46:04 IST 2 education and the amount of Rs.7,000/- awarded to the respondent out of total income of the appellant i.e. Rs.12,000/- is exorbitant and while passing the order dated 29.01.2018 the documents filed along with the reply were not considered, hence there is error apparent on the face of record, as such order dated 29.01.2018 deserves to be modified/recalled.
Alternatively learned senior counsel submits that order granting maintenance should be made applicable from the date of order and not from the date of application.
Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the prayer orally and prays for dismissal of the application and further submits that because of non-compliance of the order dated 29.01.2018, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
From bare perusal of the order dated 29.01.2018 it is clear that while passing the order awarding interim maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month this Court has taken into consideration rival submissions of both the parties and taking into consideration the admitted income of Rs.12,000/- of the appellant/husband, this Court has rightly granted interim maintenance of Rs.7,000/- that too for the respondent as well as to her son, who is residing admittedly with the respondent.
Hon'ble Apex Court recently in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and another reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324 has decided the controversy by holding that the amount of maintenance is to be paid in all the cases from the date of application and not from the date of order. Hon'ble Apex Court in para-113 held as under :-
"113. It has therefore become necessary to issue directions to bring about uniformity and consistency in the orders passed by all courts, by directing that maintenance be awarded from the date on which the application was made before the court concerned. The right to claim maintenance must date back to the date of filing the application, since the period during which the maintenance proceedings remained pending is not within the control of the applicant."
Accordingly, I.A. No.5864/2019 is hereby dismissed with the further direction to the appellant to comply the order dated 29.01.2018 fully before the next date and if the order is not complied by the next date, this Court may pass adverse order in the light of the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court.
3List the case in the week commencing 09.05.2022.
(SUJOY PAUL) (DWARKA DHISH BANSAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
ss