Dilipbhai Ranchodbhai Ramani vs Sangita W/O Dilipbhai ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4092 Guj

     C/FA/1183/2022                           ORDER DATED: 11/04/2022



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                    R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1183 of 2022
                                 With
              CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2022
                   In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1183 of 2022
==========================================================
                   DILIPBHAI RANCHODBHAI RAMANI
                               Versus
             SANGITA W/O DILIPBHAI RANCHODBHAI RAMANI
==========================================================
Appearance:
ANURADHA G RATHOD(7717) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Defendant(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
       and
       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE

                           Date : 11/04/2022
                            ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI)

By way of present appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 5.2.2022 passed by the learned Family Court, Amreli in Criminal Misc. Application No.47 of 2021 (which has been filed by the respondents - wife and minor son of the appellant under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code) whereby the learned Family Court has directed the appellant herein to pay maintenance at Rs.4,000/- per month to the respondent - wife and Rs.2,500/- per month to the respondent - minor son.

2. Mr. Parth Divyeshwar, learned advocate for Ms. Anuradha Rathod, learned advocate for the appellant would submit that the learned Family Court has erred in awarding the aforesaid amount as the appellant is unable to pay the same. He would submit that the appellant is a Photographer and his earning is

C/FA/1183/2022 ORDER DATED: 11/04/2022

less than Rs.10,000/- per month and he has to maintain his parents as well. He would submit that the learned Family Court has committed error in relying upon the oral statement of the respondent wife that the appellant has an agricultural land. He would submit that in light of above facts, the appeal may be admitted for final hearing and decision.

3. We have heard learned advocate for the appellant and perused the case papers as well as considered the questions involved in this appeal. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant is a Photographer. Considering his profession, we do not find any error in the impugned judgment and order by which only an amount of Rs.4,000/- and Rs.2,500/- per month has been awarded as maintenance to the respondent wife and minor son.

Apart from above facts, a major daughter is also residing with the respondent wife. Hence, considering above aspects, we dismiss the appeal. Since the main appeal is dismissed, civil application for stay also stands dismissed.

(A.J.DESAI, J)

(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.) KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN