Bombay High Court
Shri. Kshitish Shreekant Bapat vs Smt. Aditi Kashitish Bapat on 2 May, 2019
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sarang V. Kotwal
Priya Soparkar 1 7 fca 89-19 with cam 125-19-c
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.89 OF 2019
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.125 OF 2019
Shri Kshitish Shreekant Bapat ... Appellant /Applicant
V/s.
Smt.Aditi Kshitish Bapat ... Respondent
---
Mr.Vivek Kantawala with Mr.Amey Patil, Mr.Vivek M. Sharma,
Ms.Hetal Jobanputra and Ms.Bhairavi Waravdekar i/by M/s Vivek
Kantawala & Co. for the Appellant.
Ms.Mrinalini Deshmukh with Ms.Yasmin Godrej with Ms.Priyanka
Deshmukh i/by M/s Crawford Bayley & Co. for the Respondent.
---
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND
SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATE : MAY 2, 2019.
P.C.:-
1. Learned counsel for the respondent waives service.
2. These proceedings are filed by the husband. The appellant-
husband and respondent-wife had matrimonial dispute. Wife has therefore, filed a petition for divorce before the Family Court, which was later on converted into one for divorce by mutual ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2019 01:16:18 ::: Priya Soparkar 2 7 fca 89-19 with cam 125-19-c consent. The both sides agreed to dissolve the marriage by consent, the question of maintenance and other related issues could not be thrashed out between them. They therefore, invited the order of the Family Court. Pending such proceedings, the wife had filed application for interim maintenance for herself and two minor children. The Family Court by the impugned judgment dissolved the petition by mutual consent and gave further directions for maintenance of the wife, children and their residence. The appellant is aggrieved by the later portion of the judgment of the Family Court. Relevant portion of this judgment reads as under :-
"4. The respondent is directed to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twentyfive thousand only) per month for the petitioner and Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive thousand only) per month for son-'Arjun' from the date of application i.e. 03.12.2014 till the decision of the petition. The respondent is directed to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twentyfive thousand only) per month for son-'Vedant' from the date of application i.e. 03.12.2014 till he attains the age of majority.
5. The respondent is directed to pay permanent maintenance of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore only) to the petitioner.
7. The respondent is directed to provide to the petitioner 2 BHK flat in Worli area or around or in alternative pay her rent of Rs.1 lakh per month with ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2019 01:16:18 ::: Priya Soparkar 3 7 fca 89-19 with cam 125-19-c deposit."
3. We may note that in paragraph No.6 of the operative portion of this judgment the Family Court has directed the husband to pay Rs.25,000/- per month for the younger son-Arjun from the date of decision till he attends majority for which the appellant has not raised any grievance.
4. It is not possible to decide this appeal immediately. However, we would attempt to decide the appeal at the admission stage. Till this is done, there is a need for providing an interim formula. While providing such formula, we have taken a note of certain facts which are brought on record, which are as under:-
(i) The appellant-husband is a Director in a Public Limited Company which is part of Piramal Group of Companies. His salary structure effective from 1st April, 2018 would show annually he would receive Rs.55.85 lakhs (rounded off) by way of remuneration. For the financial year 2017-18, he had received additional payout of Rs.10.25 lakhs (rounded off) on account of ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2019 01:16:18 ::: Priya Soparkar 4 7 fca 89-19 with cam 125-19-c his performance. Thus, the gross annual income of the husband from his earning would cross Rs.65 lakhs. The wife claims that though previously she was working, in order to look after the upbringing of two young children she had given up her previous job, but presently she is working with an NGO. She earns Rs.41,000/- per month.
(ii) The couple has two children. The younger child is aged about 12 years presently. Elder one has crossed age of 18 years.
Thus, in technical terms he is no longer a minor. Neverthless, he is pursuing his education and obviously does not earn any income.
(iii) The Family Court in the impugned judgment has given directions for payment of interim maintenance from the date of the application till the decision at the rate of Rs.25,000/- each for wife and two sons (in case of the elder son till he crosses the age of 18 years). Arrears as per this order would be sizable even after deducting a sum of Rs.40,000/- per month, which the husband was paying to the family during the pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court.
(iv) The Family Court has directed the husband to pay the ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2019 01:16:18 ::: Priya Soparkar 5 7 fca 89-19 with cam 125-19-c lump sum of Rs.1 crore to full and final future settlement and also directed the husband to provide two bed-rooms apartment for the residence of the wife and the children. As against this, the counsel for the husband pointed out the wife and children are residing in the same house as that of the husband. They continue to occupy the house even after the decree of the Family court.
5. Under the circumstances, by way of interim formula, following directions are issued:-
(i) The appellant shall pay sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent-wife towards part of the arrears of interim maintenance awarded by the Family Court in the impugned judgment. This shall be done directly by depositing the amount in the account of the wife latest by 25th May, 2019.
(ii) He shall pay to the wife a sum of Rs.75,000/- per month for interim maintenance for her and minor son starting from month of April i.e. the first payment being due and payable in the month of May, 2019. This payment will also be done through RTGS directly in favour of the wife.
(iii) The appellant shall not disturb the residence of the wife ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2019 01:16:18 ::: Priya Soparkar 6 7 fca 89-19 with cam 125-19-c and children in his house where they are presently residing. It is expected that the wife would not give any cause for complaint of breach of peace. In case of difficulty, it will be open for applicant to apply for modification of this condition.
(iv) As long as the appellant continues to fulfill the above directions, there shall be no further recovery pursuant to the judgment of the Family Court.
6. Stand over to 25th July, 2019, for final hearing at the admission stage. Record and Proceedings may be called from the Trial Court so as to reach this Court latest by 1 st July, 2019. In view of the fact that learned counsel for the appellant has provided full set of documents, filing of the paper-book is dispensed with.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) (AKIL KURESHI, J.)
....
::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2019 01:16:18 :::