Delhi District Court
Simran Kaur vs Deepak Aggarwal on 7 February, 2025
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIJAY SHANKAR,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE - 04, (WEST DISTRICT)
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CA NO.:- 380/2023
UNIQUE CASE ID NO.:- DLWT01-009382-2023
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Simran Kaur
D/o Sh. Jagmohan Singh
W/o Sh. Deepak Aggarwal
R/o House No. S-1/172, First Floor,
Mahavir Nagar, Tilak Nagar,
New Delhi-110018 .... Appellant
VERSUS
Deepak Aggarwal
S/o Late Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta,
R/o H.No. N-15, 3rd Floor,
Near Reliance Fresh, Vijay Vihar,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059 .... Respondent
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07
17:45:27 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.1 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
Date of institution of the appeal : 21/11/2023
Date on which judgment was reserved : 03/02/2025
Date of judgment : 07/02/2025
JUDGMENT
1. By way of present judgment, this Court shall conscientiously adjudicate upon appeal under section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "D.V. Act") filed by the appellant (wife) against the order dated 24/08/2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'impugned order') passed by Ms. Karuna, Ld. MM (Mahila Court-02), West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, in MC No. 196/2022 titled as "Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal & Ors."
In the present appeal, the appellant has prayed to modify the impugned order dated 24/08/2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court, thereby enhancing the awarded maintenance from Rs.6,000/- to at least Rs.1,50,000/- per month from the date of filing of the said application.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07
17:45:39 -
0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.2 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
2. Brief facts necessary for just adjudication of the present appeal as stated in the present appeal are that the appellant (wife) had filed the complaint/petition u/s 12 D.V. Act against the respondent (husband) and his family members. Both the parties have filed their respective affidavits. Appellant had claimed the maintenance of Rs.1,50,000/- per month from the respondent stating that the respondent is having various movable and immovable properties and good source of income and he is living luxurious life and he neglected the appellant financially by declining to maintain her. Vide impugned order dated 24/08/2023, Ld. Trial Court has assumed the income of the respondent as per prevailing minimum wages i.e. Rs.15,000/- per month and directed him to pay a sum of Rs.6000/- per month to the appellant. In the reply and income affidavit, respondent has concealed various material facts including his income and other assets and has filed false and fabricated affidavit of assets and liabilities. Impugned order is not legally sustainable being based on presumption without any substance as well as against the documents and evidence available on record. No such or similar appeal has earlier been filed by the appellant either in this Court or in the Hon'ble High Court. There is sufficient cause and genuine reasons for Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:45:48 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.3 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal allowing the present appeal.
3. Appellant has challenged the impugned order on the grounds, as mentioned in the present appeal.
Grounds of appeal- Impugned order is based on conjectures and surmises and while passing the said impugned order, Ld. Trial Court has totally ignored the settled law, judgments and legal grounds taken by the appellant in her application and the impugned order is liable to be set-aside. Impugned order is erroneous, arbitrary, illegal, unlawful and bad in the eyes of law as the Ld. Trial Court has totally ignored and brushed aside the facts. Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate that in the income affidavit filed by the respondent, he has deliberately concealed various material facts including his income and other assets. Respondent has filed false and fabricated affidavit of assets and liabilities before the Ld. Trial Court. Respondent has admitted before the Ld. Trial Court that his mother is getting the pension of Rs.20,000/- and she is not dependent upon him. Respondent has also admitted that he was working Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:46:13 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.4 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal with his cousin sister, who is running a firm in the name of 'Regal Guru' and alleged her as proprietor of the firm but the respondent is the owner of the said firm and entitled for all the income of the same. Respondent has also concealed that he has shared details of income with the appellant besides statement of account bearing no. 0812930052 prior to the marriage and shown his account balance Rs.20 Lakh approximately. Respondent has also failed to produce or file his bank statement for the relevant period before the Ld. Trial Court and the Ld. Trial Court has also taken note of the same. Impugned order is based on presumption and against the material as well as documents available on record. Ld. Trial Court has wrongly presumed the income of the respondent as Rs.15,000/- approximately whereas admittedly, the respondent is running the firm 'Regal Guru' and enjoying huge income from the same. Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate and take judicial notice of Annexure 'J & K' wherein the respondent shown himself to be the founder and Managing Director of 'Regal Guru' and also shared the account details and statement of account with the appellant prior to the marriage. Ld. Trial Court has failed to consider that the respondent himself filed the invoice dated 19/05/2021 whereby he purchased the Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:46:19 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.5 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal phone for the appellant, however, the said invoice is in the name of 'Regal Guru'.
Similarly, respondent has filed an invoice dated 04/11/2020 whereby he gifted one watch to the appellant but the same was also in the name of 'Regal Guru'. These facts clearly show that the respondent is the owner of 'Regal Guru' and he is trying to conceal this fact from the Court. Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the respondent has intentionally concealed his actual income from the Ld. Trial Court and he intentionally and deliberately did not file true statement of other accounts to conceal his true income and to deprive the appellant from her legitimate maintenance.
Ld. Trial Court has ignored all the facts stated by the respondent and considered the facts as alleged by the respondent. Ld. Trial Court has not applied its judicial mind while passing the impugned order as Ld. Trial Court in the impugned order made the observation that respondent has not disclosed his true state of income and employment. Ld. Trial Court instead of taking judicial notice of the documents on record, has wrongly assessed the income of the respondent on the basis of Minimum Wages Act, which is not correct as per law. Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate its own finding. Ld. Trial Court has failed to appreciate that it is settled law that the Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:46:29 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.6 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal parties should approach the Court with clean hands and should not conceal any material facts. Ld. Trial Court did not consider the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and overlooked the decisions without application of mind. Ld. Trial Court has decided the application contrary to the provisions of law.
4. The respondent has contested the present appeal of the appellant by filing detailed reply, wherein preliminary objections have been taken by the respondent that the present appeal filed by the appellant is a bundle of lie and totally waste of valuable and precious time of the Court. Impugned order is perfectly justified, warranted, rational, legal, lawful and reasonable. Ld. Trial Court after considering the pleadings of the parties has passed the reasoned order, which does not require any kind of interference from this Court. Dishonest and fraudulent conduct on the part of the appellant dis-entitled her from claiming any relief from this Court as the appellant has not approached the Court with clean hands and suppressed the true and material facts in respect of atrocities and cruelties committed by the appellant in collusion and connivance with her parents. Cruel and callous conduct of the appellant Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:46:36 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.7 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal and her family members has compelled the respondent to file divorce against the appellant. Appellant cannot be permitted to take advantage of her own wrongs as she herself breached the marital obligation by committing cruelties upon the respondent. Appellant has not come with neat and clean hands and suppressed the material facts and the appellant is trying to mislead and misguide the Court. Respondent had continuously been subjected to cruelty since the inception of marriage and the respondent was treated with utmost cruelty and subjected to physical as well as mental atrocities. Appellant and her other family members always threatened the respondent to implicate the respondent and his family members in false criminal cases. Appellant has committed perjury by concealing her income and expenditure from the Court as she is well qualified/graduate and working lady and she was earning very well before or after the marriage as the said fact was already told by the appellant and her parents to the respondent and his family. Appellant is running her own coaching centre in the name and style 'Simran Coaching Centre' at S-1/172, First Floor, Old Mahavir Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110018 and earning handsome income of Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month and this fact has been Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date: 2025.02.07 17:46:43 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.8 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal concealed by the appellant from the Court. Respondent has filed the pamphlet and visiting card of the aforesaid Coaching Centre. Appellant has committed perjury and a case u/s 340 Cr.P.C. is also pending against the appellant in the Court of Ms. Shruti Sharma, Ld. MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Present appeal is sheer misuse and abuse of process of law and the same has been filed without any merit and substance and without any justified and lawful grounds. Averments made in the appeal does not satisfy the conditions and ingredients for invoking the applicability of Section 29 D.V. Act.
On merits, the para-wise reply has been given by the respondent to the present appeal of the appellant by denying the allegations/contentions of the appellant and the respondent has prayed for dismissal of the present appeal with heavy cost.
5. This Court heard the arguments on the present appeal advanced by Ld. Counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.
During the course of arguments, it was submitted by Ld. counsel for the appellant that impugned order be modified on the grounds, as mentioned in the Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:46:50 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.9 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal present appeal and awarded maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month be enhanced to at least Rs.1,50,000/- per month. On the other hand, it was submitted by Ld. Counsel for the respondent that the Ld. Trial Court has passed the impugned order in accordance with law and there is no merits in the present appeal and the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Counsel for the respondent in support of his contentions has relied upon case law titled as "Sanjay Bhardwaj & Ors. Vs. State & Anr." {171 (2010) Delhi Law Times 644}.
6. By way of present appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 24/08/2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court. The impugned order is reproduced as under:-
"24.08.2023 At 4.00 PM Present: None.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07
17:46:56 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.10 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
1. Vide the present order, I shall dispose of the interim relief application filed by the petitioner u/s 23 D.V. Act.
2. Arguments have already been heard. File perused carefully.
3. The petitioner as well as respondent no.1 has placed on record their respective income affidavits.
4. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner averring that she was married with respondent No.1 on 14.03.2021 and in the marriage her parents had given gifts and dowry items as per the demand of the respondents. She has further stated that all her dowry articles are lying within the custody of the respondents. She has further stated that respondents are of greedy nature and in order to fulfill their greed of dowry, they treated her with cruelties and always used to treat her like a maid and have mentally, emotionally and physically abused her since the first day of marriage.
5. She further stated that respondent No.1 is under legal and social obligation to maintain his lawful wedded wife and respondent No.1 beside having sufficient means willfully neglected the refused to maintain her.
6. The petitioner has further stated that she is currently unemplohyed and is wholly dependent upon her parents for bearing all her day to expenses and other basic necessities. She has prayed that respondent No.1 be directed to pay Rs.1,50,000/- per month as maintenance to the petitioner for her basic needs. She has further stated that respondent No.1 has no other liability except to maintain the petitioner.
7. In her Income Affidavit petitioner has stated that she is graduate Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:02 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.11 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal (programme) from Lovely University, Punjab and is residing at her parental house and is currently unemployed. She has further stated that respondent NO.1 is graduate and is owner/proprietor of from "Regal Guru" and it was disclosed by the respondent No.1 before marriage that he was earning around Rs.3 lakh per month and he is staying in his own accommodation.
8. On the other hand, respondent No.1 has denied the allegations of the petitioner and stated that he is B.A. and residing with his parents.
He has further stated that he is working with cousin sister but because of his heart problem now he is fully unable to do any job with her and earning nil but before health issues he was earning Rs. 10,500/- per month. He has further stated that petitioner is well qualified graduate working lady and earning a very handsome income more than Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month.
9. The truthfulness and veracity of the allegations levelled by the petitioner shall be a matter of trial. At this stage, from the allegations made, prima-facie act of domestic violence are made out against respondent No. 1.
10. By way of present application, petitioner has sought interim maintenance for herself.
11. Both parties have not placed any evidence on record which can substantiate their claim regarding assets and income of each other.
12. The petitioner has disclosed in his income affidavit that she is graduate from Lovely University, Punjab and is currently unemployed. The respondent on the other hand stated in his income affidavit that he is currently unemployed and he has no source of income. The respondent has stated that he is unemployed due to Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:09 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.12 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal health issue, however, the medical documents placed on record by him do not suggest his incapacity to earn anything. Further, the medical document is date back to May and Aug., 2022, however, as per his own averment, he was working and earning around Rs. 10,000/- till December, 2022.
13. Further, the responded has mentioned in his income affidavit that there is no source of income and he is dependent upon his cousin sisters and family friends. However, at the time of arguments on present application, court query was made from the respondent regarding his income as certain contrary facts were revealed during the arguments, at which the respondent disclosed that his mother is a pensioner and drawing a pension of Rs.20,000/- per month and he is financially dependent upon her. The said fact goes contrary to the averments made in the income affidavit, which clearly shows that the respondent has not disclosed his true state of income and employment.
14. The documents i.e. A pamphlet and visiting card placed by the respondent regarding the vocation of petitioner are not sufficient enough to prove his averment that she is taking home tuition as the same can be decided after taking evidence from both side.
15. There is no dependent upon respondent No. 1 besides the petitioner. As already discussed above, the respondent has not revealed his true state of income and therefore his income is assessed as per prevailing Minimum wages. Accordingly, respondent No.1 is directed to pay Rs.6,000/- per month as interim maintenance in favour of petitioner from the date of filling the present application till further orders, as per Minimum Wages Rules for unskilled labour. The said maintenance shall include rent and other ancillary charges.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07
17:47:14 -
0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.13 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
16. The relief sought at Point C has already been granted to petitioner vide order dt. 26.03.2022.
17. Arrears of maintenance to be cleared within six months from today. Payment towards maintenance received by the petitioner in any other case or in this case shall stand adjusted.
18. Application u/s 23 of Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 stands disposed off.
19. Petitioner is directed to file her evidence by way of affidavit on or before NDOH with advance copy to opposite party.
Put up for PE on 14.09.2023.
Copy of order be given dasti to both the parties.
(Karuna) MM/Mahila Court-02/West/THC/Delhi 24.08.2023"
7. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to mention the proceedings before the Ld. Trial Court.
Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:19 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.14 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
(a) The complainant/petitioner (appellant herein) had filed the complaint/petition u/s. 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 (2) D.V. Act alongwith an application u/s. 23 of the D.V. Act against Deepak Aggarwal (respondent herein), Santosh Aggarwal, Anju Aggarwal and Khushboo Aggarwal and the aforesaid complaint/petition u/s. 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 (2) D.V. Act is pending before the Ld. Trial Court.
In the aforesaid complaint/petition u/s. 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 (2) D.V. Act, it is mentioned that the marriage of the complainant/petitioner Simran Kaur and respondent Deepak Aggarwal was solemnized on 14/03/2021 as per Hindu rites and rituals in Delhi and no child was born out of the said wedlock. It is also mentioned that complainant/petitioner and respondent are living separately since 19/07/2021. It is also mentioned that the complainant/petitioner was subjected to mental as well as physical torture and she was harassed and ill treated with cruelty by the respondents for bringing insufficient dowry. It is also mentioned that complainant/petitioner is dependent upon her parents for all her day to day expenses, medical expenses and other basic necessities of life. It is also mentioned that she was subjected to domestic Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:25 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.15 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal violence by the respondents and she is aggrieved person as per D.V. Act.
(b) Domestic Incident Report was called from the Protection Officer and same was filed before the Ld. Trial Court.
(c) Respondents have contested the aforesaid complaint/petition of the complainant/petitioner by filing written statement/reply, wherein they denied the contentions/allegations of the complainant/petitioner and prayed for dismissal of the complaint/petition of the complainant/petitioner.
(d) Affidavits of assets, income and expenditure were filed by the complainant/petitioner Simran Kaur and respondent Deepak Aggarwal before the Ld. Trial Court.
(e) Vide impugned order dated 24/08/2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court, respondent no.1 Deepak Aggarwal (husband) was directed to pay the interim maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month to the complainant/petitioner as per Minimum Wages Rules for unskilled labour, including rent and other ancillary charges from the date of filing of application till further orders.
Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:31 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.16 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
8. Law relating to determining the quantum of maintenance was elaborated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Rajnesh Vs. Neha" {(2021) 2 SCC 324} and it was held that following factors should be taken into consideration for determining the amount of maintenance :-
"1. Status of the parties
2. Reasonable wants of the claimant
3.The independent income and property of the claimant
4. The number of persons, the non-applicant has to maintain
5. The amount should aid the applicant to live in a similar lifestyle as he/she enjoyed in the matrimonial home
6. Non-applicant's liabilities, if any
7. Provisions for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance and treatment etc. of the applicant
8. Payment capacity of the non-applicant
9. Some guess work is not ruled out while estimating the income of the non-applicant when all the sources or correct sources are not disclosed
10. The non-applicant to defray the cost of litigation
11. The amount awarded u/s 125 Cr.PC is adjustable against the amount awarded u/s 24 of the Act Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:37 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.17 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
12. Age and employment of the parties
13. Duration of marriage
14. Financial needs and resources of the parties
15. Employability of wife
16. Maintenance of minor children
17. Serious disability or ill-health of a spouse or children
18. Right to residence."
9. It is well settled law that the objective of granting interim/ permanent alimony is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of failure of the marriage and not as a punishment to the other spouse. It is also well settled that it is the duty of the husband to provide financial support to his wife and children.
It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Anju Garg & Anr. Vs. Deepak Kumar Garg" {2022 SCC Online SC 1314} that :-
"........The Family Court had disregarded the basic canon of law that it is the sacrosanct duty of the husband to provide financial support to the wife and to the minor children. The husband is required to earn money even by physical labour, if he is an able-bodied, and could not Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:42 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.18 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal avoid his obligation, except on the legally permissible grounds mentioned in the statute..."
It was also held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Rajnesh Vs. Neha" {(2021) 2 SCC 324} that:-
".....An able-bodied husband must be presumed to be capable of earning sufficient money to maintain his wife and children, and cannot contend that he is not in a position to earn sufficiently to maintain his family, as held by the Delhi High Court in Chander Prakash Bodhraj v Shila Rani Chander Prakash. The onus is on the husband to establish with necessary material that there are sufficient grounds to show that he is unable to maintain the family, and discharge his legal obligation for reasons beyond his control. If the husband does not disclose the exact amount of his income, an adverse inference may be drawn by the Court."
It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Shamima Farooqui Vs. Shahid Khan" {(2015) 5 SCC 705} that:-
".....Sometimes, a plea is advanced by the husband that he does not Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:47 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.19 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal have the means to pay, for he does not have a job or his business is not doing well. These are only bald excuses and, in fact, they have no acceptability in law. If the husband is healthy, able-bodied and is in a position to support himself, he is under the legal obligation to support his wife, for wife's right to receive maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, unless disqualified, is an absolute right....
....... This being the position in law, it is the obligation of the husband to maintain his wife. He cannot be permitted to plead that he is unable to maintain the wife due to financial constraints as long as he is capable of earning."
It was also held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled as "Bhuwan Mohan Singh Vs. Meena & Ors." {(2015) 6 SCC 353} that:-
"In fact, it is the sacrosanct duty to render the financial support even if the husband is required to earn money with physical labour, if he is able-bodied. There is no escape route unless there is an order from the Court that the wife is not entitled to get maintenance from the husband on any legally permissible grounds."
10. In the complaint/petition u/s. 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 (2) D.V. Act, it is Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:53 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.20 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal alleged by the complainant/petitioner (wife) that she was subjected to mental as well as physical torture and she was harassed and ill treated with cruelty by her husband and in-laws for bringing insufficient dowry and she was subjected to domestic violence by her husband and in-laws and she is dependent upon her parents for all her day to day expenses, medical expenses and other basic necessities of life. However, the allegations of domestic violence and dowry demand have been denied by the respondents.
Solemnization of marriage between the appellant Simran Kaur and respondent Deepak Aggarwal is not disputed. It is also not disputed that no child was born out of the said wedlock. It is also not disputed that the appellant and respondent were in domestic relationship. It is also not disputed that the appellant and respondent were resided in the matrimonial home after their marriage.
11. In the complaint/petition u/s. 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 (2) D.V. Act, the complainant/petitioner has prayed an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- per month as maintenance and other reliefs. Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:47:59 -0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.21 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal It is the contention of the appellant that respondent Deepak Aggarwal is the owner/Managing Director of firm 'Regal Guru' and he is entitled for all the income of the said firm. It is also the contention of the appellant that prior to the marriage of the appellant and respondent, the respondent has shared his details of income to the appellant showing his account balance Rs.20 Lakh approximately. It is also the contention of the appellant that as per invoices dated 04/11/2020 and 19/05/2021, the respondent had purchased the watch and mobile phone respectively in the name of firm 'Regal Guru' and gifted the same to the appellant and the same shows that the respondent is the owner of the firm 'Regal Guru'. On the other hand, it is the contention of the respondent that he is not the owner/Managing Director of the firm 'Regal Guru' and the firm 'Regal Guru' belongs to the cousin sister of the respondent namely Khushboo Aggarwal. It is also the contention of the respondent that he is having health issues and he is unable to do any work and he is dependent upon his mother, cousin sister and family friends.
Complainant/appellant in support of her contentions had not filed any Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:48:05 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.22 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal document before the Ld. Trial Court as well as this Court to show that the respondent Deepak Aggarwal is the owner/Managing Director of the firm 'Regal Guru'. On the other hand, the respondent had filed a copy of registration certificate having registration No.07BZHPA4470P1Z1 before the Ld. Trial Court wherein, Khushboo Aggarwal has been shown as Proprietor of the firm 'Regal Guru'. In the aforesaid registration certificate, the date of issuance of certificate has been mentioned as 30/08/2018.
In the complaint/petition u/s. 12, 18, 19, 20, 22 & 23 (2) D.V. Act, the complainant/petitioner has prayed an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- per month as maintenance and other reliefs. In her affidavit of assets and liabilities, the appellant has claimed the monthly income of the respondent as Rs.3,00,000/- per month. In her affidavit of assets and liabilities, the appellant has mentioned her general monthly expenses as Rs.35,000/- per month including expenses for food, clothing, medication, education, travelling and other day to day expenses.
There is nothing on the record to show that the respondent Deepak Aggarwal was/is earning Rs.3,00,000/- per month. In the absence of any document Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:48:11 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.23 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal in this regard, the appellant has failed to clarify as to how she assessed the income of the respondent as Rs.3,00,000/- per month. Appellant has also failed to clarify as to on which basis, she assessed the interim maintenance amount of Rs.1,50,000/-
per month.
12. It is also the contention of the respondent that the appellant is running her own coaching centre in the name and style 'Simran Coaching Centre' at S-1/172, First Floor, Old Mahavir Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110018 and earning handsome income of Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month. In support of his contention, respondent had filed pamphlet and visiting card to show that the appellant is running the coaching centre. Factum regarding running of aforesaid coaching centre by her has been denied by the appellant. Merely on the basis of pamphlet and visiting card, it cannot be ascertained that the appellant is running her own coaching centre in the name and style 'Simran Coaching Centre' at S-1/172, First Floor, Old Mahavir Nagar, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi-110018. No other document has been filed by the respondent to show that the appellant is Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:48:19 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.24 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal earning Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month. Even otherwise, the aforesaid fact/contention is matter of trial.
As per respondent, he is having health issues and he is unable to do any work and he is dependent upon his mother, cousin sister and family friends. Respondent has not filed any medical document before the Ld. Trial Court as well as this Court to show that he is not capable to work.
13. It is well settled law that at initial stage, only prima-facie case has to be seen. Prima-facie on the basis of pleadings of the complainant (wife) and Domestic Incident Report filed by the Protection Officer, it can be presumed that the respondent (husband) subjected the complainant/petitioner (wife) to domestic violence.
It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh case (supra) that if the husband does not disclose the exact amount of his income, an adverse inference may be drawn by the Court. It was also held that some guess work is not ruled out while estimating the income of the non-applicant when all the sources or correct Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:48:25 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.25 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal sources are not disclosed.
It is admitted fact that the respondent Deepak Aggarwal has not challanged the impugned order dated 24/08/2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court.
Respondent Deepak Aggarwal is able-bodied person and he is presumed to be capable of earning sufficient money to maintain his wife. There is nothing on the record to show that the respondent was/is suffering from any physical disability preventing him from earning his livelihood. In the absence of any evidence in this regard, the respondent cannot avoid his liability to pay the maintenance to his wife i.e. complainant/appellant. There is nothing on the record to show that the respondent is not having sufficient means and source of income to maintain his wife.
In the present case, the respondent (husband) has not disclosed his income. Respondent in his affidavit of assets and liabilities has mentioned his qualification as B.A. Ld. Trial Court has assessed the monthly income of the respondent Deepak Aggarwal as per prevailing Minimum Wages. Ld. Trial Court has awarded the interim maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month as per Minimum Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:48:32 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.26 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal Wages Rules for unskilled labour. On perusal of documents available on Trial Court Record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Ld. Trial Court has rightly assessed the income of the respondent as per prevailing Minimum Wages for unskilled labour. Ld. Trial Court has rightly awarded the interim maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month including rent and other ancillary charges from the date of filing of application till further orders.
In view of the status of the parties, standard of living, reasonable wants of the complainant/petitioner and advance age of the complainant/petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that interim maintenance in the sum of Rs.6,000/- per month is just and reasonable. The aforesaid interim maintenance amount of Rs.6,000/- per month is reasonable and justified. In the present appeal, no sufficient ground has been mentioned by the appellant for enhancement of the amount of interim maintenance.
14. The scope of appeal u/s. 29 D.V. Act has been elaborated by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case titled as "Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti Vs. State of Digitally signed by VIJAY VIJAY SHANKAR SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07 17:48:39 -0200 CA No. 380/2023 Page No.27 of 29 Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal Maharashtra & Anr." (Criminal Writ Petition No.2218/2007 decided on 16/09/2008) and it was held that :-
"An appeal will also lie against orders passed under sub section 1 and sub section 2 of the section 23 of the said Act which are passed by the learned Magistrate. However, while dealing with an appeal against the order passed under section 23 of the said Act, the Appellate Court will usually not interfere with the exercise of discretion by the learned Magistrate. The appellate Court will interfere only if it is found that the discretion has been exercised arbitrarily, capriciously, perversely or if it is found that the Court has ignored settled principles of law regulating grant or refusal of interim relief."
There is nothing on the record to show that the Ld. Trial Court has exercised its discretion arbitrarily, capriciously and perversely. There is also nothing on the record to show that the Ld. Trial Court has ignored the settled principles of law regulating grant or refusal of interim maintenance. There is no illegality, impropriety and infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Ld. Trial Court.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07
17:48:46 -
0200
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.28 of 29
Simran Kaur Vs. Deepak Aggarwal
15. All the points and contentions of both the parties were duly dealt with by the Ld. Trial Court in the impugned order.
Applying priori and posteriori reasonings and the aforesaid case laws, this Court is held that there is no illegality, impropriety and infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Ld. Trial Court. Accordingly, the present appeal u/s. 29 D.V. Act of the appellant is dismissed. No order as to costs. Nothing stated herein shall tantamount to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Trial Court Record be sent back alongwith the copy of this judgment. Appeal file be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally
signed by
VIJAY
VIJAY SHANKAR
SHANKAR Date:
2025.02.07
Announced in the open Court 17:48:51 -
0200
on 07/02/2025
(VIJAY SHANKAR)
ASJ-04 (West)
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
CA No. 380/2023 Page No.29 of 29