Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt Nirmala Gome vs Hariballabh Gome on 30 July, 2018
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1339/2017
Smt. Nirmala Gome W/o Shri Harivallabh Gome D/o Shri
Ramnath Arya B/c Bairwa , R/o House No. 380-B, R.k. Puram,
Ward No. 07, Kota Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
Hariballabh Gome D/o Shri Shivram Gome , R/o Village Khatoli,
Tehsil Itawa, Distt. Kota At Present R/o Executive Engineer,
P.h.e.d. Bundi, Distt. Bundi, Rajasthan
----Respondent
Connected With S.B. Criminal Revision No. 1116/2017 Hari Ballabh S/o Shri Shivram Gome , R/o Village Khatoli, Tehsil Itawa, District Kota, Raj., At Present Executive Engineer, P.h.e.d. Bundi, District Bundi, Raj.
----Petitioner Versus Smt. Nirmala Gome W/o Shri Hari Ballabh Gome, D/o Shri Ramnath Arya B/c Bairwa , R/o House No.380-B, R.k. Puram, Ward No.7, Kota, Raj.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nawal Singh Sikarwar in CRLR 1339/2017 and Mr. M.K. Jain in 1116/2017 For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nawal Singh Sikarwar in CRLR 1116/2017 and Mr. M.K. Jain in CRLR 1339/2017 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order 30/07/2018
1. Petitioner Nirmala Gome has preferred the Criminal Revision Petition No.1339/2017 and petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome has preferred Criminal Revision Petition No.1116/2017, aggrieved by (2 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017] order dated 03.06.2017 passed by Judge, Family Court No.3, Kota who has awarded Rs.4,000/- per month to petitioner Nirmala Gome from the date of filing of the application. Petitioner Nirmala Gome has preferred revision petition for enhancement of the maintenance amount and petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome has preferred the revision petition for setting aside the order of maintenance.
2. It is contended by counsel for petitioner Nirmala Gome, that respondent Hari Ballabh Gome is Executive Engineer in PHED and looking to his salary, the maintenance awarded to the petitioner is meagre. It is also contended that respondent Hari Ballabh Gome has many properties and petitioner Nirmala Gome has no source of income. She is an advocate who is having no briefs and is only contesting her own case.
3. Counsel for petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome in Criminal Revision Petition No.1116/2017 has contended that his wife Nirmala Gome filed a case under Section 498-A and 406 of I.P.C. in which petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome was acquitted. Petitioner Nirmala Gome moved a petition under the Domestic Violence Act, wherein Rs.3,000/- was awarded to her as maintenance. Thereafter, she moved an application for enhancement of maintenance, on ground of increase in salary by the implementation of Seventh Pay Commission. She prayed that interim maintenance be enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. Court allowed the application and enhanced the interim maintenance to Rs.10,000/- per month from 10.07.2017.
4. It is also contended by counsel for Hari Ballabh Gome that since Nirmala Gome is receiving Rs.10,000/- per month as interim maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, there was no (3 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017] justification in awarding additional Rs.4,000/-. It is also contended that a divorce petition was filed by Hari Ballabh Gome on the ground of cruelty which stands allowed and a divorce decree is passed in favour of Hari Ballabh Gome by the Family Court on 30.03.2018. The limb of argument is that it is Nirmala Gome who is harassing Hari Ballabh Gome, the passing of decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty establishes the said fact. It is also contended that Hari Ballabh Gome is to look-after her mother and has to pay the loan and he is under suspension.
5. It is also contended that Nirmala Gome is an advocate who is also running a beauty parlour. The Court has wrongly rejected the plea of Hari Ballabh Gome on the ground that an advocate cannot indulge in other business. It is also argued by counsel for the petitioner Hari Ballabh Gome that there was no justification of Court to award maintenance from the date of filing of the application, reliance in this regard is placed on "Madan Lal Vs. Smt. Pushpa Devi, 2018 (1) WLC (Raj.) UC Page 666."
6. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner Nirmala Gome that there is a loan on the house in which Nirmala Gome is residing and Hari Ballabh Gome has not repaid the loan and Nirmala Gome had to arrange funds from her relatives to repay the loan.
7. I have considered the contentions.
8. Admittedly, petitioner is residing in the house belonging to Hari Ballabh Gome and her application for enhancement of interim maintenance in the domestic violence case stands allowed by the Court below and interim maintenance under the Domestic Violence (4 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017] Act has been increased from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per month.
9. While passing the order dated 10.07.2017, Court has mentioned that amount of Rs.10,000/- under the Domestic Violence Act will be in addition to the maintenance given under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. by the Family Court. Hari Ballabh Gome was suspended as he has remained in custody and he is now receiving Rs.54,000/- per month after deduction of State insurance, GPF and income tax. In addition he has to pay installment of Rs.16,000/- per month and the net amount which he is receiving is Rs. 38,000/- per month.
10. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs.4,000/- awarded by the Family Court as maintenance does not appear to be excessive or meagre.
11. However, the contentions of counsel for Smt. Nirmala Gome that she is under threat of being dispossessed from the house in which she is residing, suffice to say that if such situation occurs, Nirmala Gome would be free to apply before the Domestic Violence Court as the application for Domestic Violence Act is still pending. In totality the order passed by the Court below with regard to enhancing Rs.4,000/-, is upheld, however, grant of maintenance from the back date deserves to be set-aside as there is no justification for the same in view of the fact that the dispute between parties with regard to 498-A and 406 of I.P.C. stands decided in favour of husband Hari Ballabh Gome and his application for divorce on the ground of cruelty also stands decided in his favour.
(5 of 5) [CRLR-1339/2017]
12. Accordingly, revision petition filed by the Nirmala Gome is dismissed and that filed by Hari Ballabh Gome is partly allowed. The amount of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month would be payable from the date of the order of the Court below.
13. A copy of this order be placed in the connected file.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J Amit/28-29 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)