Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Tarun Kaushik vs Seema Kaushik
2014 Latest Caselaw 5513 Del

Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 5513 Del
Judgement Date : 5 November, 2014

Delhi High Court
Tarun Kaushik vs Seema Kaushik on 5 November, 2014
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                  Date of Decision: 5th November, 2014
+     CM(M) 965/2013 & C.M.APPLN.14617/2013
      TARUN KAUSHIK                                    ..... Petitioner
                  Through:            Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate

                         versus

      SEEMA KAUSHIK                                    ..... Respondent
                  Through:            Mr. Harish Kumar, Advocate

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                      JUDGMENT

(Oral)

Impugned order of 11th March, 2013 grants interim maintenance at the rate of `7,000/- per month to respondent in an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The factual background of this case already stands noted in the impugned judgment and needs no reproduction.

At the hearing of this petition, it was vehemently submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that respondent was working in VLCC (Vandana Luthra Curls and Curves) and is a post-graduate and is capable of earning and this aspect has been ignored by the concerned Family Court and therefore, impugned order deserves to be set aside.

Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order and the material on record, I find that when the marriage of the parties had not run into rough weather, then respondent was working but due to troubled marriage

CM (M) 965/2013 Page 1 of the parties, respondent is not working.

Learned counsel for respondent had informed during the course of hearing that respondent had taken training at VLCC and she has not worked there.

Be that as it may. It is not disputed that appellant is earning `25,000/- per month.

In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that grant of interim maintenance at the rate of `7,000/- per month is amply justified.

Finding no substance in this petition, it is dismissed. The petition and the application are accordingly disposed of.


                                                         (SUNIL GAUR)
                                                            JUDGE
      NOVEMBER 05, 2014
      s




CM (M) 965/2013                                                       Page 2
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter