Vaishali W/O. Sandeep Chungde vs Sandeep S/O. Vijaysing Chungde
2023 Latest Caselaw 1130 Bom

                                                          951-revn-305-2022 judg.odt
                                   (1)


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

            CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 305 OF 2022

 Sau. Vaishali W/o Sandeep Chungde,
 Age : 36 years, Occu: Household,
 R/o. C/o Kavita Vikas Shira, 15
 Ajanta Housing Society,
 Shahanurwadi,
 Dist. Aurangabad.                                    ...Applicant

          Versus

 Sandeep S/o Vijaysing Chungde
 Age : 39 years, Occu : Service,
 R/o Waki, Tq, Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon                  ...Respondent

                               WITH
            CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.110 OF 2021

 Sandeep S/o Vijaysing Chungde
 Age : 41 years, Occu : Pvt. Service,
 R/o Waki, Tq, Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon                  ...Applicant

          Versus

 Sau. Vaishali W/o Sandeep Chungde,
 Age : 35 years, Occu: Pvt. Tuitions and Service,
 R/o. C/o Kavita Vikas Shira, 15
 Ajanta Housing Society,
 Shahanurwadi, Dist. Aurangabad.                      ...Respondent


 Mr. A.S. Barlota, Advocate for Applicant in REVN/305/22 &
 Respondent in REVN/110/2021.
 Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for Respondent in REVN/305/2022 &
 Applicant in REVN/110/2021.
                                 ...

                                   CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J.

                                    DATED : FEBRUARY 02, 2023




::: Uploaded on - 03/02/2023                 ::: Downloaded on - 03/02/2023 21:15:00 :::
                                                             951-revn-305-2022 judg.odt
                                       (2)


 ORAL JUDGMENT:-

 1.               Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the

 parties heard finally.

 2.               Both parties have challenged the same order of learned

 Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad in Application No.E-

 11/2016 dated 25.06.2021. Both are disputing the quantum of the

 maintenance.

 3.               Learned counsel for the applicant would argue that the

 husband had ample income from salary, flour mill and agricultural

 field. At the time of presenting the petition, the husband was getting

 the salary of around Rs.70,000/- per month. However, the learned

 Principal Judge, Family Court erred in not granting the maintenance

 of Rs.25,000/- per month and ignored the source of income and

 standard of living of the family.

 4.               Per contra, learned counsel for the husband would submit

 that the quantum determined by the learned Principal Judge, Family

 Court, Aurangabad is erroneous. The wife is highly educated; hence,

 able to make the source of income.             The husband has family

 responsibilities. He has raised a huge loan and after deducting the

 loan, he was getting salary of Rs.55,000/- per month. Therefore, the

 quantum of Rs.20,000/- is liable to be reduced to 10,000/- per

 month.




::: Uploaded on - 03/02/2023                   ::: Downloaded on - 03/02/2023 21:15:00 :::
                                                                951-revn-305-2022 judg.odt
                                        (3)


 5.               Perused the impugned order and the papers placed before

 the Court. It is not in dispute that at the time of the application, the

 husband was a lecturer and getting salary of Rs.70,000/- per month.

 If the case of the husband is considered that the wife is also educated,

 that goes to show that both have a high standard of living.                       The

 argument of the learned counsel for the husband that the husband

 has raised a loan and it was deducting from his salary, cannot be

 considered for the reason that only the statutory deductions are

 allowed to be excluded from considering income for the purpose of

 determining the maintenance. The loan may be raised with some

 motive. It is not the case of husband that apart from salary, he has no

 other source of income as pleaded by the wife.                 Considering the

 standard of living, the sky rocketing prices of daily needs, the medical

 expenses, rent etc., the maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month

 claimed by the wife was reasonable. The income of the husband was

 proved on record. Therefore, the quantum determined by the learned

 Principal Judge, Family Court, Aurangabad needs to be modified.

 6.               In the light of the above discussion, the following order is

 passed:

                                     ORDER

I) Criminal Revision Application No.305 of 2022 is allowed.

II) The monthly maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- is enhanced

to Rs. 25,000/- per month from the date of this order.

951-revn-305-2022 judg.odt

III) Rule is made absolute in above terms.

IV) Criminal Revision Application No.110 of 2021 stands dismissed.

 V)           Rule stands discharge.

 VI)          Record and proceedings be returned to be learned Family

 Court, Aurangabad.




                                                (S. G. MEHARE, J.)




 Mujaheed//