Bombay High Court
Saurabh S/O Dilip Sharma vs Swati W/O Saurabh Sharma on 13 August, 2024
Author: G. A. Sanap
Bench: G. A. Sanap
1 revn34.22.O.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (REVN) NO.34 OF 2022
(Saurabh s/o Dilip Sharma Vs. Swati w/o Saurabh Sharma)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A. A. Majumdar, Advocate for Applicant.
None for Non-Applicant.
CORAM: G. A. SANAP, J.
DATE: 13th AUGUST, 2024.
Heard learned Advocate for the applicant.
Advocate for the non-applicant is absent.
2. In this application challenge is to the order dated
03.01.2020 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court,
Nagpur, whereby the learned Judge has directed the
applicant to pay the maintenance to the non-applicant at
the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month from the date of the
application i.e. 23.10.2018.
3. The non-applicant has filed application under
Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for maintenance. It is stated that
she was staying with the applicant. She was subjected to
domestic violence. She has filed the proceedings under
Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 against the applicant. On account of the
ill-treatment and torture meted out to her, it was not
possible for her to cohabit with the applicant.
The non-applicant further contended that she is not doing
any job. She has no source of income. Earlier she was doing
job in a private company. However, she has left the said job.
2 revn34.22.O.odt
It is stated that the applicant is earning Rs.2 lakhs per
month as the Dentist. He has sufficient means to pay the
maintenance.
4. The applicant filed the reply and opposed the
application. According to the applicant, he is not earning
Rs.2 lakhs per month. He has taken a loan and repaying the
same through EMI of Rs.20,000/-. He has filed the
statement of assets and liabilities and made disclosure of all
these facts. The applicant has denied other material
averments made in the application.
5. The learned Principal Judge on the basis of the
available material partly allowed the application and
awarded the interim maintenance as stated above.
The order is under challenge in this revision application.
6. I have heard learned Advocate for the applicant.
Learned Advocate for the non-applicant is absent. I have
gone through the record and proceedings.
7. It is apparent on the face of record that both the
parties have filed their respective affidavits of assets and
liabilities. The husband in the statement of his assets and
liabilities has disclosed the source of his income.
The husband has also produced on record the copies of the
Income Tax Returns for last eight years. The learned Judge
of the Family Court has taken into consideration the
material on record and quantified the interim maintenance.
The learned Judge in paragraph no.5 of the judgment has
recorded the reasons. Perusal of paragraph no.5 of the order
would show that the learned Judge has arrived at the
quantum of interim maintenance on assuming certain facts.
3 revn34.22.O.odt
In my view, therefore, the order awarding interim
maintenance at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month could not
be said to be passed on the basis of the available record. As
far as quantum is concerned, in my view, the interference
would be necessary.
8. The applicant is a Dentist, practicing for last ten
years. He has established his Clinic. He has stated that the
Clinic is on rental basis. It, therefore, cannot be said that he
has started the clinic without any income. In the facts and
circumstances, on the basis of the available evidence, in my
view, the learned Judge ought to have awarded the interim
maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month.
The available evidence fully justified the entitlement of the
non-applicant for interim maintenance at the rate of
Rs.15,000/- per month. As far as the entitlement to get the
interim maintenance is concerned, there is no need to
interfere with the order. However, the quantum is required
to be modified.
9. Accordingly, the revision application is partly
allowed.
10. The quantum of the interim maintenance is
modified from Rs.20,000/- per month to Rs.15,000/- per
month, payable from the date of the application i.e.
23.10.2018.
11. The application is allowed and disposed of.
(G. A. SANAP, J.)
NSN
Signed by: Mr. N.S. Nikhare
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 14/08/2024 18:19:39
