Interim maintenance amount reduced on account of it being ‘excessive’ owing to low income of the husband

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH

ON THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

WRIT PETITION NO.208059 OF 2017 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

SRI RACHAYYA
S/O SANGAYYA SHANKIN
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O MUDDEBIHAL, TALUK MUDDEBIHAL
DISTRICT: VIJAYAPURA … PETITIONER

(BY SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. BHAGYALAXMI
W/O RACHAYYA SHANKIN @ BHAGYALAXMI
D/O GULAYYA HIREMATH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
OCC: ADVOCATE, DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT
NAVNAGAR, BAGALKOT
DISTRICT: BAGALKOT – 587 101… RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SHIVANAND PATIL, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR
ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED INTERIM ORDER OF MAINTENANCE DATED
14.09.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &
J.M.F.C., MUDDEBIHAL, IN M.C.NO.23 OF 2015 VIDE
ANNEXURE-H.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER
The respondent-wife filed an application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, seeking payment of interim maintenance. During pendency of the divorce petition by the impugned order the same was allowed. The petitioner was directed to pay Rs.5,000/- per month as interim maintenance. Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the amount of maintenance awarded is too excessive. That she owns various landed properties as well as a four wheeler. She has sufficient income. Therefore, grant of maintenance is uncalled for. That the petitioner-husband is only running a Photostat machine and the income is very low.

3. The same is disputed by the respondent. That there is huge establishment run by the petitioner and what is awarded is far too meager.

4. On hearing learned counsel and on going through the material on record, I’m of the considered view that grant of maintenance is far too excessive. There is material to indicate that there are substantial properties in the name of wife and she is also a practicing advocate. The material on record would show that the petitioner is running a Photostat machine.

5. Under these circumstances, I’m of the considered view that it is just and appropriate that the monthly maintenance is modified to a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month. The same shall be paid from the date of filing of the application namely 21.10.2016. All arrears at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month from the said date shall be paid to the respondent-wife within a period of four weeks from today. The maintenance shall be paid within 5th of every month to the respondent-wife.

Petition is disposed off accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!