Court No. - 21
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 458 of 2019 Appellant :- Dileep Balani Respondent :- Geeta Balani Counsel for Appellant :- Ashutosh Sharma
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Present appeal has been filed challenging the order of the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar passed on the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act of the respondent granting maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.5,000/- per month and lumpsum litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/-. Appellant was married to the opposite party on 6.8.2003 according to Hindu rites and custom at Udaipur, Rajasthan.
According to the appellant after living for sometime, the opposite party went to her paternal house and she refused to come back. It is further averred that they are living separately for last 14-15 years. In the year 2015, the appellant filed Matrimonial Petition No.1311 of 2015 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of separation and cruelty. During pendency of the said case, the opposite party filed an application under Section 125 Cr. P.C. before the Family Court, Udaipur, Rajasthan. On 20.8.2018, the Court below granted maintenance of Rs.1500/- per month to the opposite party.
It is further stated that on 7.4.2017, an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the opposite party for maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.8,000/- per month and lumpsum litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-. The said application was contested by the appellant who filed his objection. It has been argued by learned Counsel for the appellant that the opposite party has concealed the fact that the Family Court at Udaipur had granted maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the tune of Rs.1500/- per month.
He further submitted that the Court below has not considered that his monthly salary was 6000/- and had awarded Rs.5000/- per month as interim maintenance. It was further submitted that the opposite party had only prayed for grant of Rs.10,000/- as lumpsum litigation expenses while the Court below had granted lumpsum litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/-.
We have heard Sri Ashutosh Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellant and have perused the record.
From the reading of the order impugned dated 26.4.2019, one thing is clear that Court below has not taken into consideration the grant of maintenance of Rs.1500/- in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by the Family Court at Udaipur, Rajasthan which was specifically brought to the notice of the Court by the appellant.
Further the prayer of the opposite party for lumpsum litigation expenses was only for Rs.10,000/- while the Court below had granted litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/- which was not justified. We, therefore, modify the order dated 26.4.2019 to the extent that the maintenance pendente lite granted by Court below of Rs. 5000/- per month shall include the amount awarded as maintenance in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and further the lumpsum litigation expenses awarded by the Court below to the tune of Rs.20,000/- is reduced to Rs.10,000/-.
With the aforesaid, the order dated 26.4.2019 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar is modified. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 S. Singh