Delhi High Court - Orders
Santosh Kumar Thakur vs Rashmi Choudhary on 16 April, 2025
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~80
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAT.APP.(F.C.) 142/2025
SANTOSH KUMAR THAKUR .....Appellant
Through: Mr.Prashant Mendiratta, Ms.
Malvika Choudhary, Ms.Veenu
Singh, Advs.
versus
RASHMI CHOUDHARY .....Respondent
Through: Ms.Malavika Rajkotia,
Ms.Aashna Talwar, Ms.Purva
Dua, Ms.Sajal Arora, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR
ORDER
% 16.04.2025 CM APPL. 21934/2025 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 142/2025 & CM APPL. 21933/2025
2. Issue notice.
3. Notice is accepted by Ms. Malavika Rajkotia, the learned counsel for the respondent.
4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Family Court has erred in entertaining two successive applications seeking interim maintenance, though of different amounts, filed by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as, 'HMA'), disregarding the well settled legal position that multiple applications under Section 24 of the HMA cannot be entertained unless there is substantial change in the circumstances.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2025 at 21:35:29
5. He submits that the learned Family Court has granted very excessive maintenance and has completely overlooked crucial aspect that in the second application filed under Section 24 of the HMA by the respondent, she exaggerated the expenses unreasonably and sought illusionary expenses not corroborated by any documentary evidence. He further submits that while passing the impugned order the learned Family Court did not take into consideration the various credits in the bank accounts of the respondent, her income from the work of free lancing photography. The Court did not take into consideration the bank balance of the respondent, mutual funds and financial assets of the respondent and assume complete financial dependents by the respondent on the petitioner.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the learned Family Court has taken note of each and every objection raised by the appellant. She further submits that both parties are affluent and belong to the high strata of the society. The learned Family Court has passed the Order after taking into consideration the status of the parties when they were living together. She further states that the respondent has no fixed income as she is a freelance photographer, therefore, her income varies month to month, however, the same is not sufficient to maintain her lifestyle to which the parties are accustomed to.
7. Heard.
8. A perusal of the Impugned Order shows that the learned Family Court has considered in detail the evidence on record before finding that the respondent does not have an independent source of income.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2025 at 21:35:29 The learned Family Court has also considered the status of the parties and especially the financial standing of the appellant. The learned Family Court has then considered the expenses claimed by the respondent.
9. Taking the above factors into account, the learned Family Court determined the respondent to be entitled for maintenance of Rs. 7 lakhs. The learned Family Court passed the following directions for its payment:-
"74. Now the next question is whether petitioner be directed to hand over the sum of Rs. 7 lakhs a month to the respondent and she be taking care of entire expenses or she be handed over part of some amount leaving the remaining amount with the petitioner for meeting the expenses. Both the arrangements would bring about a lot of problem because if entire amount is paid to respondent for meeting the expenses, the unexpected expenses/demand of the children would not be met by petitioner and, therefore, children would feel that his father is not taking care of them. On the other hand, if petitioner is left with the entire money to meet the expenses, then every time unexpected expenses/demand of the children would come to the fore he would think that respondent is instigating the children to demand money from their father. Similarly, there may be other circumstance where such situation may arise.
75. Thus, in the opinion of this court, a middle way could be the division of funds and putting at their respective disposal would probably minimize future disputes and misgivings between the parties. Since respondent along with children is residing at the Belaire Apartment with entire set up where house helps, driver, gardener, cleaner etc. were already working, therefore, it would be better if respondent is given Rs. 4,00,000/- every month for meeting the household expenses which would include groceries, toiletries, grooming, clothings (for all three), shoes (for all three), entertainment (for all three), movies (for all three), fuel (for all three), salaries of house help, driver, cleaner facilities, common area etc, small repairs m the house/appliances and of car etc.
76. With remaining amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-, petitioner would meet the expenses of the children i.e. school fees, sports coaching, tuition, books, stationery, uniform, foods/snacks on demand from outside i.e. Blinkit, Swiggy, Zomato etc, birthday party/gifts, counseling, This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2025 at 21:35:30 forms of competitive exams and other expenses of the children."
10. Considering the submissions, only as an interim measure, it is directed that during the pendency of the present appeal, the appellant shall continue to pay 75% of the monthly maintenance as ordered by the learned Family Court and clear the arrears thereof as per the Impugned Order, within four weeks from today.
11. Let reply to the appeal as well as to the stay application be filed within a period of four weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within a period of three weeks thereafter.
12. List on 9th September, 2025.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J RENU BHATNAGAR, J APRIL 16, 2025/p/kg Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/04/2025 at 21:35:30