Amol S/O Ashok Jaiswal vs Rajlakshmi Wd/O Ashok Jaiswal
2022 Latest Caselaw 9667 Bom

                                  1



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 427/2022

        Amol S/o Ashok Jaiswal,
        aged about 46 years, Occ. Service,
        R/o. Opposite Thote Hospital, Ratanlal
        Plot, Akola, Tah. & Dist. Akola, Police
        Station Civil Lines, Akola.

                                                  ... PETITIONER

                              VERSUS

        Smt. Rajlakshmi Wd/o. Ashok
        Jaiswal, aged 68 years,
        Occ. Household, R/o. Sanglud
        Khurd, Tah. & Dist. Akola.



                                                  ... RESPONDENT
_____________________________________________________________
       Mr. P. S. Girdekar, Advocate for petitioner.
       Mr. R. M. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent.
______________________________________________________________

                 CORAM                     : VINAY JOSHI, J.

                 DATE OF JUDGMENT          : 22.09.2022.


ORAL JUDGMENT :

          RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. Heard finally by consent of respective parties.

3. The petitioner-son raises a challenge to the order of interim

maintenance dated 12.04.2021 passed by the Family Court in the

proceeding filed by respondent-mother under Section 125 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure ('Code'). The petitioner-son challenged the

order on the ground that the rate of interim maintenance fixed by the

Trial Court is to excessive and exorbitant. It is argued that the

respondent-mother is living with her another son Ashwin and thus, she

is not in need of monetary aid for her survival. Besides that the

respondent-mother is having sufficient source of income and therefore,

she cannot be termed as unable to maintain herself. It is submitted that

the respondent-mother owns agricultural land and a tractor from which

she is deriving income.

4. The other side supported the interim order by contending

that the agricultural land is joint family property, for which a suit for

partition is pending. It is submitted that though respondent-mother is

registered owner of a tractor, however it is being used by all family

members. According to respondent-mother, her other two sons are

looking after her, but the petitioner is not extending financial aid and

thus, the interim maintenance order is appropriate.

5. It is informed that the respondent-mother has completed

her evidence in the Family Court and now the matter is kept today for

recording evidence of petitioner-son. Having regard to said facts as well

as this being interim stage, I am not inclined to consider the disputed

factual aspect about the respondent's entitlement for maintenance. In

view of advanced stage of proceeding in the Trial Court, I deem it

appropriate to restrict myself to the extent of quantum. The petitioner

is serving as Lab-Assistant from which he is earning salary to the tune

of Rs. 39,636/- as per salary certificate. The petitioner-son has

produced document of bank receipt to show that he is paying housing

loan installment of Rs. 8,600/- per month. Besides that the

petitioner would submit that he is shouldering the responsibility of his

wife and two school going children.

6. Already, the evidence is under way. On fact, it is to be

decided as to whether the respondent-mother is deriving landed

income as well as from tractor. Moreover, the petitioner's responsibility

as well as the effect of loan installment needs a factual scrutiny.

Undeniably, at present mother is living with her one of the son and the

agricultural land stands in her name. On the other hand, besides

salaried income of petitioner, it is pointed that out that three

agricultural land stands in the name of petitioner-son of which revenue

extracts are produced.

7. In above facts, it is apparent that the amount as has been

fixed towards interim maintenance cannot be considered as exorbitant.

The above observations are of preliminary nature, the Trial Court shall

independently assess amount of maintenance. Hence, petition stands

dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the main petition

expeditiously.

(VINAY JOSHI, J.)

Gohane

Digitally signed by JITENDRA JITENDRA BHARAT BHARAT GOHANE GOHANE Date:

2022.09.22 16:59:41 +0530