Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Dipak vs Binduben

High Court Of Gujarat|28 February, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Challenge is made to the order of the learned Judge, Family Court, Vadodara dated 24th June 2011 passed in HMP No. 2034 of 2010 whereby, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for the wife who was seeking interim alimony of Rs. 20,000/= per month, the Court had directed the present petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 4,000/= per month, by its impugned order dated 24th June 2011. It is the say of the petitioner that he is earning a sum of Rs. 4,300/= per month and he is also responsible to maintain his parents. He also seeks to rely upon a Certificate dated 20th July 2011 issued by Jyotir Krishnakant Patel stating that the petitioner is working in his office and he is drawing sum of Rs. 4,300/= per month.
On having heard learned advocate for the petitioner Shri Ankit Shah and on having perused the papers with his assistance, there does not appear to be any requirement to interfere with the order passed by the learned Judge, Additional Family Court, Vadodara who has taken care of all the aspects by noting that the petitioner is having a degree in Commerce and Diploma in Software; that the petitioner was working with a share broker company of Shri Khandwala and has subsequently joined another share broker company of some Marfatiya. In absence of any reliable documentary evidence as proof of earning, the Court presumed monthly income of the petitioner at Rs. 10,000/= to Rs. 12,000/= per month, and accordingly, granted interim alimony of Rs. 4,000/= to the wife.
The certificate dated 20th July 2011, which is being sought to be relied upon empathetically pointing out that his earning is Rs. 4,300/= per month does not inspire any confidence. It is of course subject matter of proof. The Family Court has granted interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In absence of anything being pointed out that there was any jurisdictional error that has been committed by the Court and in absence of any material to term the order being capricious or per verse in any manner, this petition does not succeed and it stands disposed of.
{Ms.
Sonia Gokani, J.} Prakash* Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dipak vs Binduben

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2012