Jitesh Lal vs Smt. Nisha Kumari
2018 Latest Caselaw 2992 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 539 of 2018
 

 
Appellant :- Jitesh Lal
 
Respondent :- Smt. Nisha Kumari
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari
 

 
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J.

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard Sri Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant.

Earlier time was granted to the appellant to take steps but steps have not been taken so far and now the application has been moved for further extension of time which under the facts and circumstances of the case we are not inclined to grant time. On merits, the husband-petitioner had filed a suit for divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In the said divorce the respondent had filed an application Under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and during the pendency of the suit Under Section 13 the application has been allowed granting 2,500/- for travelling and expenses and Rs. 10,000/- towards the Advocate fee and Rs. 40,000/- for maintenance the total amount Rs. 50,000/- was directed to be deposited within five days by order dated 16.7.2018.

Learned counsel for the appellant has not deposited the amount and has filed this appeal upon which time was earlier granted but steps have not been taken and now an application has been moved which has already been rejected as stated above. So far as the determination of amount of travelling expenses, fee and maintenance is concerned the appellant is an Income Tax Officer and has an income of Rs. 65,000/- as salary and further a sum of Rs. 65,000/- from other sources such as rent receipt from immovable property. The respondent however, as claimed by the appellant, gets about about 25,000/- from Rajiv Gandhi National fellowship per month and Rs. one lakh from coaching and therefore, there is no need for grant of 50,000/- under section 24 to the wife. While passing the order impugned it has been categorically held that although the appellant has stated in his affidavit that she is earning Rs. 1,50,000/- per month but no documentary evidence has been filed before the court below.

The document indicating that the wife is getting Rs. 25,000/- is a document which has yet not been proved but has been filed for the first time in the appeal. Since the same was not presented before the court below nor it has been proved we can not take cognizance such a material.

Considering the status of the husband-appellant in our considered view that Rs. 50,000/- fixed by the court below under section 24 is an appropriate amount and the respondent is entitled to get the same amount.

There is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.10.2018

Masarrat

(Bachchoo Lal,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)