Balasaheb Sakharam ... vs Pramilabai Balasaheb ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11491 Bom

                                          1               906-FCA.49-19+CA.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                  906 FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.49 OF 2019
                    WITH CA/7893/2019 IN FCA/49/2019

                 BALASAHEB SAKHARAM HARISHCHANDRA
                               VERSUS
                 PRAMILABAI BALASAHEB HARISCHANDRA

                                      ...
              Advocate for Appellants : Mr. Patil Prakashsingh B.
               Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Kulkarni Mukul S.
                                     ...

                               CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, AND
                                       S. G. MEHARE, JJ.

                               DATE       : 21.08.2021

     PER COURT :-

1. The petitioner-husband is aggrieved by the order dated

10.04.2019 delivered by the learned Family Court in Petition

No.8 of 2018, vide which, he is directed to pay enhanced

maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month

with effect from 13.01.2016. He was a Police Constable in the

State Police Constabulary and he was drawing salary, till

December 2015, as per the 6th Pay Commission

Recommendations and from January 2016 as per the 7th Pay

Commission Recommendations. Recently he has retired on

attaining the age of superannuation in May 2021.

2 906-FCA.49-19+CA.odt

2. The learned advocate for the respondent submits that

the fact that the petitioner has recently retired would also

establish that his wife is also growing old. Any amount less

than Rs.10,000/- would not be able to sustain her. She has no

other source of income. As the appellant has deserted her and

he has residing separately, he is retaining the entire pension

amount.

3. The impugned judgment indicates that the respondent-

wife has a son and a married daughter, from her marriage with

the appellant. Salary certificates of the appellant were

produced on record. The Registration Certificates of vehicles,

in the names of family members of the appellant after his

second marriage, were also produced on record at Exh.62, 63

and 63-A. It was brought on record that the appellant has

performed an illegal second marriage. Mr. Kulkarni, therefore,

justifies the enhancement of monthly maintenance from

Rs.1,500/- that was granted ten (10) years ago, to Rs.10,000/-

per month with effect from the filing of the proceedings by

which time the 7th Pay Commission Recommendations had

been implemented. It was also brought on record that the

3 906-FCA.49-19+CA.odt

children from the illegal second marriage were leading a

luxurious life having 2 - two wheelers and 1 - four wheeler in

their name. The son of the respondent-wife is residing with

her.

4. Considering the above, we do not find any merit in this

appeal and the same is, therefore, dismissed.

5. Pending Civil Application, in the above circumstances,

does not survive and stands disposed off.

(S. G. MEHARE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

...

vmk/-