Gujarat High Court
Piyush Harilal Patel vs Bhargavi Piyush Patle on 1 December, 2015
Author: S.H.Vora
Bench: S.H.Vora
C/SCA/4260/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4260 of 2015
===========================================================
PIYUSH HARILAL PATEL....Petitioner(s)
Versus
BHARGAVI PIYUSH PATLE....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHADRAY A DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS. KRUTI M SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA
Date : 01/12/2015
ORAL ORDER
[1] With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
[2] By way of present petition under Article-227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner (husband) challenges the order dated 15.10.2014 passed below Exh.9 passed by Family Court, Surat in Family Suit No.267 of 2013, whereby the learned Judge, Family Court granted maintenance amount of Rs.6,000/-per month and Rs.9,000/- to the respondent-wife by way of cost including legal expenses etc in exercise of powers under Section-24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
[3] Having heard the submission made at Bar, learned advocate Mr.H.A.Dave appearing for the petitioner- husband wound contend that the learned Family Court has not considered the certificate of income issued by the employer of the petitioner vide dated 04.09.2014, Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Thu Dec 03 02:10:40 IST 2015 C/SCA/4260/2015 ORDER whereby his monthly wage is shown as Rs.10,000/- plus other allowances of Rs.5,500/-. Learned advocate Mr. Dave would further contend that the petitioner is required to discharge other family obligations and therefore, amount awarded by the learned Judge, Family Court is on higher side and therefore, the same may be reduced suitably in view of income of the petitioner-husband. [4] Per contra, learned advocate Ms.Kruti M.Shah, appearing for the respondent-wife would contend that the order is legal and valid and no interference at the hands of this Court is required considering the income of the petitioner-husband.
[5] Having heard the submissions made at Bar and more particularly considering the certificate relied upon by the petitioner-husband, it appears that the petitioner is earning Rs.15,500/-by serving with one Ashvi Consultancy Service as a Software Consultant. Learned advocate Mr. Dave could not point out any other family obligations being discharged or required to be discharged by the petitioner-husband in the reply filed before the learned trial Judge. So, considering the certificate relied upon by the petitioner-husband itself, it can be said that the petitioner-husband is earning Rs.15,500/-per month and therefore, monthly maintenance of Rs.6,000/-to respondent-wife cannot be said on higher side, but on the contrary seems to be reasonable one and therefore, no case is made out to interfere with the order more particularly, observations recorded by learned trial Judge Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Thu Dec 03 02:10:40 IST 2015 C/SCA/4260/2015 ORDER at paras-2 to 4 of the impugned order.
[6] In view of the above observation, there is no substance in the present petition and therefore, it is dismissed. Notice is discharged.
(S.H.VORA, J.) siddharth Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Thu Dec 03 02:10:40 IST 2015