Gujarat High Court
Priyankaben W/O Kuldeepsinh ... vs Kuldeepsinh Jaswantsingh Kher on 3 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16630/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16630 of 2024
================================================================
PRIYANKABEN W/O KULDEEPSINH JASWANTSINH KHER D/O
HITENDRA PRATAPSINH ATODARIA
Versus
KULDEEPSINH JASWANTSINGH KHER
================================================================
Appearance:
MR NOYEL A CHRISTIAN(12821) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 03/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs.
"(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to isue any appropriate writ, direction or order for quashing and setting aside the impugned Order dated 1.07.2024 below Exh.11 in Family Suit No.1160 of 2022, passed by Learned Judge, Family Court, No.2, Surat, in the interest of justice.
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleasedenhance the amount of maintenance to be provided to the applicant and YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the present opponent (Husband) to pay Rs.25,000/- per month to applicant, as maintenance amount as the interim relief to the applicant, in the interest of justice; till the disposal of the present application.
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to keep stay implementation, execution, operations and enforcement of the impugned order dated 1.07.2024 below Exh.11 in Family Suit No.1160 of 2022, pass by the Learned Judge, Family Court No.2, Surat, till final disposal of this application.
(D) *****"
2. Heard learned Mr. Noyel A. Christian for the petitioner.
Rule returnable forthwith.
3. Upon consent of learned advocate for the petitioner, the present petition is taken up for final hearing. Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 23:23:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/16630/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025 undefined
4. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
4.1. It is the case of the petitioner that marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 26.06.2011 as per the Rituals and Customs at Surat. After marriage, petitioner and respondent were living at Surat and out of the said wedlock, a daughter was born. After some time, marital disputes cropped up between the parties, the husband filed an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for a relief of restitution of conjugal rights before learned Family Court at Surat. Petitioner-
wife filed maintenance application seeking maintenance of herself and for minor daughter. Respondent-husband was directed to pay Rs.6,000/ as interim maintenance to minor daughter under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The learned Family Court rejected application qua petitioner-wife. Against which, the petitioner-wife is before this Court.
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that learned Family Court has erred in granting only Rs.6,000/- Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 23:23:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/16630/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025 undefined towards maintenance of minor child only and further erred in rejecting the application of petitioner-wife. It is further contended that petitioner as on today, is earing Rs.40,000/- per month and respondent-husband is earning Rs.15,000/- per month. It is further contended that the respondent-husband is legally as well as morally liable to maintain petitioner and minor daughter. It is further submitted that petitioner is serving as a teacher in Government School. The intention of the respondent- husband is to avoid maintaining petitioner-wife and therefore, petitioner has assailed the order passed by learned Family Court. Except above, no other submissions are canvassed by learned advocate for the petitioner.
6. I have considered the submissions canvassed by learned advocate for the petitioner and also perused the impugned order. It appears from the record that admittedly, the petitioner-wife is serving in Government School and as per the record, she is earning Rs.40,000/- per month. Learned Family Court has also Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 23:23:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/16630/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025 undefined considered a fact that petitioner-wife has not produced any iota of evidence with regard to extra income generated by the respondent-husband. It is also an undisputed fact coming out on record that the income of respondent-husband is less than the income of the petitioner-wife. Learned advocate for the petitioner-wife also could not point out any perversity or illegality being committed by learned Family Court in awarding Rs.6,000/- per month as interim maintainance towards child. It is not only the duty of respondent-husband to maintain his child but it is also the equal duty of an earning-mother, who is admittedly earning more than respondent-husband. More particularly, there is no justification in claiming Rs.15,000/- per month as interim maintenance of child, I do not find any perversity or illegality being committed by learned Family Court, petition is meritless. Scope under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is very narrow and this Court can only interfere in the order impugned if the same is de hors the provisions of law and there exists patent illegality and Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 23:23:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/16630/2024 ORDER DATED: 03/10/2025 undefined arbitrariness in arriving at the conclusion. Moreover, considering the facts, exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked since the learned advocate for the petitioner could not point out any gross error being committed by learned trial Court.
8. Resultantly, the present petition stands dismissed. Rule is discharged. The learned Family Court shall decide main proceedings without being influenced by observations made hereinabove.
(D. M. DESAI,J) RINKU MALI Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Oct 07 23:23:02 IST 2025