Rashmi vs Deepender Verma
2015 Latest Caselaw 3132 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                          MAT.APP. No.49/2012

                                            Decided on : 20th April, 2015

       RASHMI                                                ..... Appellant

                    Through:        Mr. Rajeshwar Kr. Gupta & Ms. Sumati
                                    Sharma, Advocates with appellant in
                                    person.
                           versus

       DEEPENDER VERMA                                 ..... Respondent

                    Through:        None.


       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI

CM No.11216/2012 (Under Section 24 of the HMA Act, 1955)

1. This order shall dispose of an application filed by the appellant's

wife for grant of an interim maintenance under Section 24 of the

Hindu Marriage Act to the tune of Rs.75,000/- towards litigation

expenses and Rs.90,000/- per month as maintenance for herself

and her minor child.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant has filed

the present appeal against the respondent for setting aside of the

impugned judgment and decree dated 21.02.2012 passed by the

Court of Ms. Reena Singh Nag, ADJ-02, Karkardooma Courts,

Delhi in HMA No. 314/2011 titled as Deepender Verma Versus

Smt. Rashmi, wherein, a decree of divorce on the ground of

cruelty u/s13 HMA was granted by the Court. The appeal already

stands admitted.

3. The appellant by virtue of the present application has stated that

she does not have any independent source of income and she is

dependent on her father, mother and brother for the purpose of her

sustenance. She has drawn attention to the statement of the

respondent in the petition filed u/s 13 HMA wherein he has

admitted that he is holding the post of Reader in P.C Bagla (P.G)

College, Hathras (UP). It is averred by the appellant that salary of

the respondent as 'Reader of a Degree College' is not less than

Rs. 85,000/- per month besides other perquisites and privileges. It

has also been stated that the respondent is also receiving a sum of

approximately Rs.55,000/- per month as income from rent of

immovable properties including agricultural income from the land

owned in his name. It is contented that this makes the total

monthly income of the respondent come to the tune of

Rs.1,40,000/- per month and even then the respondent has failed

to look after his family namely the appellant and the minor child.

It has been further stated that the respondent's mother is getting a

pension of approximately Rs.18,000/- per month and therefore the

appellant and their minor child are sole dependants on the

respondent.

4. It is the case of the appellant that she is bearing all the expenses

of the child alone with assistance from her parents and the said

expenses pertaining to the schooling and such others come to

approximately 10,000/- per month. Further it is averred that the

rentals for the accommodation in which the appellant and the

child are presently residing are Rs. 12,000/- per month.

5. The respondent/husband has filed his reply and contended that he

is only a temporary contract lecturer in PC Bagla College and is

earning a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month. It has been denied that he

is employed as a professor in the said College, or that he is getting

a salary of Rs.85,000/- per month. The respondent has also denied

the factum of earning Rs.55,000/- by way of rentals from his

immovable properties and has further stated that he does not own

any agricultural land in his name. On the contrary, he has taken a

plea that the appellant has herself run away from the matrimonial

home and, therefore, cannot be permitted to take advantage of her

own wrong and therefore she is not entitled for the maintenance

as sought by her in the instant application.

6. The appellant has also filed her rejoinder wherein the facts of the

application were reaffirmed. It was contended that the appellant is

able to show to the Court that the respondent is earning a sum of

Rs.17,500/- as is reflected in the affidavit filed by the respondent

which clearly belies his initial stand that he was earning

Rs.8,000/- per month only. She has also given the details of some

of the properties owned by the respondent.

7. The respondent in his affidavit has admitted that he owns

agricultural land measuring 9 bighas at village Mungsa, District

Hathras and he has admitted to be receiving Rs 10,000 per annum

as rentals from the said agricultural land. The respondent has

further admitted to having received Rs 8,50,000/- as profits in the

year 2011 from the sale of agricultural land ad-measuring 9

bighas. Apart from the aforesaid the respondent has stated that he

has 5 LIC policies in his name for a sum of Rs 2,00,000/-.

8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the appellant and perused the documents placed on record. I

am of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to an ad interim

maintenance for herself and her minor son but the question which

arises for consideration is what should be the quantum of

maintenance. The appellant has alleged that the respondent is

earning Rs.85,000/- as salary which was denied by the respondent

in his reply and it was stated that he was earning only Rs.8,000/-

per month. In the affidavit filed by the respondent it was admitted

that the salary on the date of the affidavit is Rs.17,500/- per

month and Rs. 833 per month is earned as rentals from the

agricultural land. Out of this Rs.18,333/-,the appellant is not

being paid anything and is only getting a sum of Rs.2,800/- per

month as fixed by the Criminal Court under S.125 Cr.P.C that too

irregularly. I feel the same is grossly inadequate to sustain the

appellant and the minor child.

9. In the affidavit filed by the respondent he has admitted to

receiving an income of Rs. 18,333 in totality, as salary and rentals

from the immovable property. Further monthly expenditure to the

tune of approximately Rs 20,550/- has been admitted by the

respondent which is exclusive of the litigation expenses being

incurred by the respondent in the 7 pending cases against him for

which he is incurring expenses of approximately Rs 3000/- per

hearing. It is inconceivable as to how the respondent manages to

maintain himself and his allegedly dependent mother when his

monthly expenditures clearly exceed his admitted income. This is

more so as the respondent has declared that he has no other source

of income. Further it has been stated on affidavit by the

respondent that he in 2011 received Rs 8,50,000/- as profits from

the sale of agricultural land. If it is assumed that the said amount

is not invested but is lying in a bank account even then a

minimum interest of 4-5% would be earned on the same.

10.In the reply dated 15.01.2013 the respondent has stated to be

receiving a salary of Rs 8,000 per month. Curiously enough in the

affidavit filed by the respondent he was earning a salary of Rs

9,000 per month since 2009 which was further increased to Rs

17,500 per month with effect from 01.07.2014, it is difficult to

understand how the respondent would be paid such a meagre sum

when he is a doctorate holder working as a professor in a post

graduate college.

11. The Honourable Supreme Court in Bhuwan Mohan Singh vs.

Meena AIR 2014 SC 2875 has categorically held that it is the

sacrosanct duty of the husband to render the financial support

even if he is required to earn money with physical labour, if he is

able bodied. There is no escape route unless there is an order from

the Court that the wife is not entitled to get the maintenance from

the husband on any legally permissible grounds. It was also

observed by the honourable apex court that all such applications

pertaining to maintenance, divorce or custody of child must be

decided expeditiously by the court owing to the factum that the lis

before it pertains to emotional fragmentation and delay can feed it

to grow.

12. It is really very strange that as and when a person is saddled with

payment of maintenance, he either becomes indigent or turns out

to be unemployed and tries to wriggle out of his responsibility of

paying maintenance to the spouse who has no independent source

of income. The appellant is an able-bodied person and is well

qualified, having a doctorate degree and working as a professor in

a post graduate degree college, therefore, there can be no

plausible excuse for him to not be able to provide for the

maintenance of the appellant and the minor child.

13. For the aforesaid reasons, I feel that the appellant deserves to be

granted maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. I

accordingly allow the application of the appellant under Section

24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and direct with the direction that a

sum of Rs.10,000/- each to be paid to the appellant and her son by

way of ad-interim maintenance so that they can maintain a decent

standard of living. The aforesaid sum shall be in addition to the

sum of Rs.2,800/- which has been directed to be paid to the

appellant by the Matrimonial Court. It is made clear that this

amount shall be paid from the date of the application and so far as

the arrears are concerned, the same shall be paid within a period

of six weeks from today and maintenance for the month of May,

2015 and thereon shall be paid on or before 7th day of each

English calendar month to the appellant. The appellant shall also

be paid a cost of litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.22,000/-

within a period of six weeks. With this order, the application for

grant of maintenance stands disposed of.

15. List this matter in the Category of 'Regulars' on its own turn.

V.K. SHALI, J

APRIL 20, 2015/ad