Court No. - 4
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 546 of 2019 Appellant :- Priyanka Srivastava Respondent :- Vipin Bihari Lal Counsel for Appellant :- Sharad Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Ankit Gaur
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Heard counsel for the appellant and Sri R. C. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ankit Gaur, learned counsel for the respondent.
This appeal has been filed by defendant-appellant, Priyanka Srivastava against judgment and order dated 13.05.2019 passed by Additional Family Judge/ F.T.C. (Constituted under 14th Finance Commission), Ballia in Suit No. 55 of 2012 (Vipin Bihari Lal vs. Priyanka Srivastava), by which application 66 Ga (2) filed by appellant before him has been allowed in part and and she has been awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month as interim maintenance and Rs.2,000/- per month towards expenses of litigation from the date of order.
The only ground on which learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the order dated 13.05.2019 is that the learned Additional Family Judge ought to have awarded interim maintenance from the date of filing of application 66 Ga (2) by her before him.
Per contra, Sri R.C. Singh, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the plaintiff- respondent has submitted that there is no provision requiring that interim maintenance should always be awarded from the date of filing of application. In this regard he invited our attention to Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called as 'Act'). He has further submitted that on account of delaying practice adopted by defendant-appellant the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent in the year 2013 has not been decided despite order passed by this Court on 20.02.2019 in First Appeal No. 810 of 2018 (Priyanka Srivastava vs. Vipin Bihari Lal) in this regard.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In order to appreciate the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, it would be useful to extract Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act hereinbelow:
"24. Maitenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.- Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the court to be reasonable.
[Provided that the application for the payment of the expenses of the proceeding and such monthly sum during the proceeding, shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the wife or the husband, as the case may be]"
Even the most superficial glance at Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act indicates that there is nothing therein mandating the Court to award interim maintenance from the date of filing of application.
We do not find that impugned order suffers from any illegality requiring any interference by this Court.
The appeal is dismissed.
However, considering the fact that divorce suit is pending for the last more than 7 years, we direct Additional Family Judge/ F.T.C. (Constituted under 14th Finance Commission), Ballia to make every possible endeavour to decide Suit No. 55 of 2012 within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellant has undertaken that his client Priyanka Srivastava shall appear before Additional Family Judge/ F.T.C. (Constituted under 14th Finance Commission), Ballia on the next date fixed and make herself available for cross-examination.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 V.S.Singh