Sandeep Manharkumar Christi vs Pragati W/O Sandeep Manharkumar ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4414 Guj

     C/SCA/13671/2021                                JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13671 of 2021


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
==========================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed                     No
      to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                              No

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy                    No
      of the judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question                    No
      of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
      of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
                    SANDEEP MANHARKUMAR CHRISTI
                                Versus
               PRAGATI W/O SANDEEP MANHARKUMAR CHRISTI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI

                               Date : 26/04/2022

                               ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The Petitioner / Original Applicant has preferred the present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the learned Family Court, Gandhinagar upon Exh.Exh.14 in Family Suit No. 111 of 2020 dated 19.7.2021, whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gandhinagar (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Judge") has partly allowed the Application Exh.14 and ordered to the Applicant Husband to pay Rs.32000/- monthly by way of interim maintenance from the date of

C/SCA/13671/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022

application dated 6.2.2021 to the Opponent - Wife and children regularly, till the Suit is decided finally, and has also directed to pay Rs.25000/- to the Opponent - Wife towards Advocate fees and other expenses.

2. The facts of the case in brief are that the Petitioner had married with the Opponent on 23.5.2009 and having children namely Shifa and Shiyan aged 10 years. The Petitioner Husband has filed Divorce Petition under Section 10(1)

(x) of the Indian Divorce Act before the learned Family Court, Gandhinagar, which was registered as Family Suit No. 111 of 2020. That the Opponent appeared in the matter and has field her reply and also filed an application under Section 36 of the Indian Divorce Act for interim maintenance for herself and children. The learned Family Court, Gandhiangar vide order dated 19.7.2021 upon Exh.14, partly allowed it and directed the Petitioner husband to pay Rs.32000/- per month to the Opponent Wife and children as interim maintenance from the date of the Application i.e. 6.2.2021 till the Suit is decided finally.

3. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Manish Patel for the Petitioner. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner has submitted that the learned Judge has not considered the fact that the wife is residing in the Flat and had dragged the Petitioner husband from it and had not permitted him to enter the said Flat even though the Flat is in joint name of husband and wife and only the petitioner husband is paying EMI Rs.25,373/- per month which was not deducted from the maintenance. That the Petitioner has filed the Affidavit as per the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 730 of 2020 but the same has not been considered by the learned Family Court. That the Petitioner has given an amount of his saving to wife from SIP and Mutual Funds and that amount is also withdrawn on 5.12.2020 which is required to be deducted from the maintenance but the same was not considered by the learned Family Court. That the Petitioner is also paying other EMIs for Car etc. That the contention regarding earning of the wife is also stated in the

C/SCA/13671/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022

reply and even the Opponent wife has intentionally not filed her statement of account which she is having earlier and had suppressed the facts qua her earning. That the Petitioner is residing alone in Rajkot and is bearing his own expenditure which is also to be deducted from earning which has not been considered by the learned Judge, which is bad in law. It is contended that the learned Judge has also not considered the amount of Rs.55000/- which was transferred in the name of wife and children in the year 2021. It is therefore submitted that the learned Judge before passing an order upon Application Exh.14 has not considered all such aspects and granted the maintenance, which is required to be quashed and set aside. In the alternative, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner has prayed that this Hon'ble Court may pass appropriate directing the learned Family Judge to dispose of the Suit within some stipulated time.

4. In view of the submission made by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, and, as the learned Advocate for the Petitioner has not invited any reasoned order, therefore, without going into the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to consider the alternative prayer made by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner to direct the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gandhinagar to decide Family Suit No. 111 of 2020 within some reasonable time, preferably within some reasonable time. Therefore, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gandhinagar to decide Family Suit No. 111 of 2020 within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the writ of this order as per his own roster. It is directed that both the parties shall cooperate for early disposal of the Suit. The Petition stands disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs. Notice is discharged.

(A. C. JOSHI,J)

J.N.W