Delhi High Court
Sp vs Rm on 14 November, 2017
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MAT.APP.(F.C.) 149/2017
SP ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Pradeep Narula, Ms. Bhawna
Khanna and Ms. Urmila Verma,
Advocate.
versus
RM ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Lalit, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA
ORDER
% 14.11.2017
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (ORAL)
1. The appellant wife is aggrieved by an order dated 07.07.2017
whereby an application filed by her under Section 24 of the Hindu
Marriage Act 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'HMA'), was dismissed by
the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court Dwarka, New Delhi, by
holding that she has sufficient amount and ability to maintain herself; and
is therefore, not entitled for any interim maintenance or litigation
expenses from the respondent/husband.
2. The learned Trial Court Judge on a perusal of the application, reply
as well as the affidavit of income, assets and liabilities filed by both the
parties came inter alia to the following finding:-
"16. A perusal of the application, reply as well as affidavit of
income, assets and liabilities filed by both the parties shows
that applicant/petitioner is working as Air Hostess in Jet
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 149/2017 page 1 of 4
Airways and earning Rs. 55,000/- approximately. She has
taken a life insurance of Rs. 6400/-. She is also having account
in Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai. As per her own
affidavit, her total expense per month comes out about Rs.
40,000/- to Rs. 45,000/-."
3. The learned Trial Court by way of the impugned order dated
07.07.2017 also recorded the following:-
"21. A bare perusal of the application, reply, affidavit of
income, expense and liability and material placed on record
by the parties shows that the applicant/petitioner is working as
Air Hostess and as per herself admission, she has been
earning a sum of Rs. 55,000/- per month from her service. The
statement of account of the applicant/petitioner shows that the
salary of the applicant/petitioner is not static but it depends
upon the working days. In March 2015, she has earned a
salary of Rs. 92,776/- whereas in February 2015 her salary
was Rs. 65,765/-.
22. The statement of account of the applicant/petitioner
shows that petitioner has been earning more than Rs. 55,000/-
per month as the salary besides other perks. The above amount
was credited into her account after all statutory deductions.
Thus her gross income would be much more than the amount
shown credited in her account. The petitioner has not placed
on record her pay slip which could reflect the gross income of
the petitioner."
4. A perusal of the above paragraphs clearly reveal that on her own
admission, the appellant has been earning a sum of Rs. 55,000/- per
month from her employment with Jet Airways. On the other hand, the
respondent, who is a Director in Coveredge Marketing Pvt. Ltd. with
30% share holding in the said organisation, earns a salary of
approximately Rs. 59,000 per month.
5. It is further observed that the respondent does not own any house
property in his own name and lives in the accommodation owned by his
mother.
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 149/2017 page 2 of 4
6. In this behalf, the learned Trial Court also observed:
"24. Perusal of affidavit and other documents shows that
income of both the applicant/petitioner and non-
applicant/respondent is almost similar. Even the petitioner's
income is more than the respondent. Documents placed on
record thus clearly shows that applicant/petitioner is having
sufficient source of income to maintain herself. She is neither
dependent upon her family members nor upon the non-
applicant/respondent, therefore, she is not entitled for ad
interim maintenance from the non-applicant/respondent as
claimed by her."
7. Section 24 of the HMA makes a provision for award of interim
maintenance to a spouse who has no independent income sufficient to
support him/her during the pendency of matrimonial lis. A Division
Bench of this court in Mat. App.(F.C)143/2014 decided on 05.09.2016,
titled as Rupali Gupta Vs. Rajat Gupta observed as follows:
"7. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act makes a provision
for award of interim maintenance to a spouse who has no
independent income sufficient to support her and fight the
legal battle. In the decision reported as AIR 2003 Mad 212
Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy Vs. M. Devaki High Court of
Madras while construing the provision of Section 24 of the
Hindu Marriage Act and relying on its earlier decision
reported as (2002) 2 M.L.J. 760 Kumaresan Vs. Aswathi held
that for grant of maintenance pendent lite, the party should not
have sufficient independent income for her/his support."
8. The import, object and intent of Section 24 of the HMA is to
enable the court to award reasonable maintenance pendent lite and
expenses of proceedings to a spouse, who does not have an independent
source of income, sufficient to support him or her, and necessary
expenses for the proceedings in the court, with a view that the
matrimonial proceedings may be continued without imposing any
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 149/2017 page 3 of 4
hardship to him or her.
9. In view of the foregoing discussion, and in view of the
circumstance that the appellant admittedly earns a sum of Rs. 55,000/-
per month from her employment as contrasted with a sum of Rs. 59,800/-
earned per month by the respondent, we concur with the view taken by
the learned Trial Court in the impugned order and therefore, find no
reasonable ground to interfere.
10. In the present circumstance, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to
costs.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
DEEPA SHARMA, J
NOVEMBER 14, 2017/js
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 149/2017 page 4 of 4
