Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deepinder Singh Narang vs Smt Kritya Naran on 18 July, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 MP 1635
1 CRR-4016-2017
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRR-4016-2017
(DEEPINDER SINGH NARANG Vs SMT KRITYA NARAN)
9
Jabalpur, Dated : 18-07-2019
Shri Devendra Kumar Gangrade, counsel for the applicant.
Shri Rajendra Kumar Babbar, counsel for the respondents.
Applicant filed this criminal revision under Section 397 read with
Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 4.3.2017
passed in M.J.C. No.316/2015 by the II Additional Principal Judge, Family
Court, Bhopal whereby awarding interim maintenance under Section 125 of
the Cr.P.C. to both the respondents and directed applicant to pay
Rs.60,000/- to respondent No.1 and Rs.20,000/- to respondent No.2.
Facts given rise to this petition, in short, are that respondent No.1 is a
legally married wife of the applicant. Respondent No.2 born out of that wedlock. Respondent No.1 was being harassed and cruelly treated by the applicant when she was at her matrimonial house. She left the matrimonial house and presently residing with her parents along with her son but applicant not paid a single penny towards the maintenance. She along with her son totally dependent upon her mother and father as she is not having any means of permanent source of income. Applicant is having running factory and company and having large house and earned more than Rs.50.00 lakh per month. Respondents filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for obtaining the maintenance allowance and also filed an application for interim maintenance allowance.
Learned Family Court after hearing both the parties vide order dated 4.3.2017 disposed of the application filed for interim maintenance and directed the applicant to pay Rs.60,000/- to respondent No.1 and Rs.20,000/- to respondent No.2 as an interim maintenance, till final disposal of the main petition and also ordered that if respondent is receiving any interim maintenance amount, in any case, that amount should be adjusted and Digitally signed by MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI Date: 25/07/2019 15:11:23 2 CRR-4016-2017 remaining amount be paid to the respondents.
Applicant being aggrieved by that impugned order dated 4.3.2017 filed this criminal revision on the ground that respondent No.1 is having sufficient educational qualification but she does not voluntarily worked, therefore, she is not entitled for any maintenance from her husband. This preposition of law has been settled by the Apex Court in the catena of judgment. Also raised a ground that learned Family Court awarded a huge amount of maintenance in respect of respondent No.1 who is well qualified could earned a sufficient income for herself and she is deliberately not working anywhere. Applicant filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act wherein respondent No.1 categorically stated that she is not willing to live along with the applicant. She left the company of applicant without any sufficient cause not fulfilling the matrimonial obligations, herself filed an application under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act for seeking the divorce from the applicant and receiving interim maintenance amount. Respondent No.1 is not liable for getting the maintenance, the impugned order passed by the learned court below is totally illegal, not proper, therefore, prayed to set aside the order of maintenance.
Learned counsel appeared for the respondents submitted that no doubt, interim maintenance order has been passed in petition filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the competent court but that order is under challenge in this High Court. Learned trial Court after considering all relevant facts and circumstances passed a reasoned order. Applicant filed this petition on wrong ground and prayed to dismiss the petition.
Having heard both the counsel. Perused the impugned order as well as the documents filed along with this petition. It is undisputed that respondent No.1 is a legally married wife and respondent No.2 born out of that wedlock. It is not disputed that both parties filed a petition before competent court. Applicant filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Digitally signed by MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI Date: 25/07/2019 15:11:233 CRR-4016-2017 After filing the petition by the respondent No.1 under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, that petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been withdrawn by the applicant. It is also not disputed that presently both respondents are not living with the applicant. Respondent No.1 living with her parents along with her son and filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for obtaining the maintenance from the applicant.
Applicant also filed a copy of judgment of Delhi High Court dated 12.2.2019 passed in MAT.APP (F.C.) 93/2018 . In this case, wife is highly qualified and has been working in the reputed company and presently employed with a good salary. On that ground, learned Family Court disallowed the pendent lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, but that order has been affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court. Applicant nowhere stated that he is paying some money regularly to the respondents for their maintenance. Respondents filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking prayer for interim maintenance supported by an affidavit. She categorically stated that she is not having any permanent means of income for maintaining herself. Whether she is educated lady and can earn money for maintaining herself and her son is not to be considered while deciding the application for interim maintenance. It is a pendente-lite arrangement so that wife should not lead the life of starvation. The applicant nowhere stated that he is not a able-bodied man and could not earn the money. The applicant only stated that he is not having a much earning as stated in the application filed by respondent No.1. The applicant is having an obligation and he is duty bound to maintain his wife and child. This Court find that learned Family Court not erred in granting the interim maintenance. So far as amount of maintenance is concerned, learned counsel appeared for the applicant submits that it is on higher side. The Family Court in the case filed u/s 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act passed an order u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for interim maintenance and that has been challenged before the High Court in writ petition. The Hon'ble High Court fixed Rs.30,000/- per month Digitally signed by MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI Date: 25/07/2019 15:11:23 4 CRR-4016-2017 maintenance in favour of the respondent No.1.
Considering all the papers and affidavit filed along with this petition and after perusal of all documents and order passed by the competent court, this court find that learned Family Court equating the status of wife and son with the applicant then fixed the interim maintenance allowance. This Court not found any perversity in fixing of that amount, Family Court also ordered that if respondent No.1 and 2 are receiving the interim maintenance by any order passed by any competent court, the awarded maintenance allowance should be adjusted with that amount. Meaning thereby if respondent No.1 is receiving any pendente lite interim maintenance by order of any competent court that amount should be adjusted in the awarded interim maintenance allowance.
Applicant filed a copy of order passed by this Court dated 10.4.2018 passed in Criminal Revision No.917/2017- Mohit Jain vs. Sonali Jain in which this court categorically referred the case of Apex Court in 1997 (11) SCC 286- Sandeep Choudhary vs. Radha Choudhary and held that amount received for the interim maintenance from any court should be adjusted with the amount of maintenance provided under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. In the same way, this Court passed and order in Writ Petition No.2973/2016 dated 3.11.2016 -Manish Vs. Smt. Naina, modified the order on the ground that applicant if receiving the amount from the order of other parallel court that amount will be adjusted with the amount of interim maintenance.
It is held in the case of Kalyan Dey Choudhary vs. Rita Dey Choudhary while deciding the Civil Appeal No.5369/2017 order dated 19.4.2017 that the maintenance allowance should be 25% of the salary of husband.
Learned Family Court has already mentioned in the order that if respondent is receiving any interim maintenance allowance in any case, it is to be adjusted in the awarded interim maintenance allowance.
On the basis of forgoing discussion and preposition of law, this Court is of the view that learned Family Court not erred in deciding the quantum of Digitally signed by MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI Date: 25/07/2019 15:11:23 5 CRR-4016-2017 the applicant.
Considering all these facts and circumstances, this Court not found any illegality, incorrectness and perversity in the order.
Accordingly, this criminal revision stands dismissed.
(VISHNU PRATAP SINGH CHAUHAN) JUDGE irfan Digitally signed by MOHD IRFAN SIDDIQUI Date: 25/07/2019 15:11:23