Kamal Nath Gaur vs Smt. Gunja
2022 Latest Caselaw 18723 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 3
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 337 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Kamal Nath Gaur
 
Respondent :- Smt. Gunja
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Jai Prakash Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

Order on Delay Condonation Application

Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant/husband.

This appeal has been filed beyond limitation by 132 days.

Cause shown for delay is sufficient.

The delay is condoned.

The delay condonation application is hereby allowed.

Office is directed to give regular number to the appeal.

Order on Memo of Appeal

Heard learned Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant/husband.

This appeal under Section 19 of the Family Court's Act, 1984 has been filed praying to set aside the judgement and order dated 11.04.2022 in Matrimonial Case No.1603 of 2018, (Kamal Nath Gaur versus Smt. Gunja), passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gorakhpur whereby application 16-A, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the defendant-respondent/wife has been allowed, directing the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month for interim maintenance to the defendant-respondent/wife.

Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that the appellant and respondent are husband and wife. The plaintiff-appellant has filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which has been registered as Matrimonial Case No.1603 of 2018 in which the defendant-respondent/wife has filed an application being paper no.16-A, under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The plaintiff-appellant/husband is Class IV employee, as per his salary slip of September, 2020 filed as evidence by the defendant-respondent/wife, his salary after deduction is Rs.27,894/-.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the income of the plaintiff-appellant/husband, we do not find any error in the impugned judgment. The direction to the plaintiff-appellant/husband to pay Rs.4,500/- per month to the defendant-respondent/wife for interim maintenance cannot be said to be excessive.

For all the reasons afore stated, we find that the present appeal is totally frivolous. Consequently, it is dismissed at the admission stage.

Order Date :- 24.11.2022

I.A.Siddiqui