Madras High Court
V.Manivannan vs K.Selvi on 24 November, 2021
C.M.A.No.1051 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
C.M.A. No.1051 of 2018
V.Manivannan ... Appellant
vs
K.Selvi ... Respondent
Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Court Act against the
order and decretal order dated 14.03.2018 made in I.A. No.1730 of 2016 in
H.M.O.P. No.459 of 2014 on the file of the VI Additional Family Court,
Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Ramesh
For Respondent : No appearance
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of this Court was delivered by T.RAJA, J.]
This appeal has been filed against the impugned interim order dated
14.03.2018 passed by the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai in I.A.
No.1730 of 2016 in H.M.O.P. No.459 of 2014 directing the appellant husband
to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent wife and Rs.5,000/- to the
minor child towards interim maintenance from the date of the petition,
namely, 01.03.2016 till the disposal of the main petition and also to pay a
sum of Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1051 of 2018
2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant husband submitted that
both the appellant and the respondent are B.Tech. Graduates; the appellant
is working in Tata Consultancy Services; and the respondent has been
working in a private concern. As there was a matrimonial dispute between
them, the appellant has filed O.P. No.459 of 2014 under Section 13(1)(i-a) of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of the marriage, which was
taken place on 18.10.2012 at Murugan Temple, Tiruttani, Thiruvallur District,
raising various allegations, inter alia, the respondent was not willing to stay
with him along with his family members and she has been demanding
separate home. At one point of time, when she went to the Police Station
with her Advocate, both the appellant and the respondent agreed for getting
divorce on mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, for
which, when the draft petition was made ready, due to some stringent
conditions imposed by the respondent wife on the appellant, the same could
not be proceeded with. Finally, when the appellant filed the above petition
seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, though
the respondent wife filed a counter affidavit admitting the fact that she was
working with Geojit Paribas and earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month,
later, she took a contra stand in the affidavit filed by her in M.C. No.22 of
2020 stating that she is getting a meagre sum of Rs.6,000/- per month and
she is not able to meet out the financial needs of the family expenses,
educational expenses and the basic needs. Learned counsel appearing for
the appellant further submitted that though the appellant has paid school
tution fees for his son, who is now 7 years old and studying in D.A.V. School,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1051 of 2018
Velacherry, from the year 2017, the respondent wife refused to receive the
same, by demanding more money and therefore, the appellant has stopped
paying the tution fees, but, even today, the appellant is ready to meet out
the expenses including, uniform, books, medical expenses and tution fees
etc. Since the respondent wife has not disclosed about her employment and
income as to where she is working and how much income she is getting in
the petition filed by her in M.C. No.22 of 2020 seeking maintenance, the
appellant husband is not able to get her pay slip.
3.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, by producing the pay
slip for August 2021, submitted that the appellant is working in TATA
Consultancy Services and after deduction of Income Tax, Provident Fund,
Professional Tax and Voluntary Provident Fund, he is getting net pay of
Rs.74,771/- and further deduction of Housing Loan, which comes around
Rs.22,000/-, he is getting only about Rs.40,000/- Since the respondent wife
has come to the Court with un-cleaned hands by taking a double stand in the
counter affidavit in the above O.P. and in the petition seeking maintenance,
she is not entitled to get any interim maintenance, as the respondent, being
an B.Tech. Graduate, could have earned sufficient salary to meet out the
necessary expenses. In view of the heavy burden of expenses met out by
the appellant, he is prepared to pay Rs.10,000/- per month to the
respondent wife towards maintenance, apart from paying tution fees,
medical expenses and other incidental expenses for his son as and when
arises.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1051 of 2018
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. In spite of
service of notice to the respondent, there is no representation on her behalf
either through counsel or by herself.
5.A perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent in the
petition filed by the appellant in O.P. No.459 of 2014 seeking divorce under
Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act would show that the respondent
was working with Geojit Paribas and earning Rs.15,000/- per month,
whereas, in the M.C. No.22 of 2020 seeking maintenance filed by her, she
has stated that she is earning a meagre sum of Rs.6,000/- per month,
without disclosing about the name of the company, where she is working and
whether she has resigned her earlier job or not. When the respondent filed
the above petition seeking interim maintenance, she could have mentioned
about the name of the concern/establishment, in which she is working and
whether she has resigned from the earlier company or not, so as to enable
the Court to find out the merits of the petition. As she has admitted in the
counter affidavit that she is getting Rs.15,000/- per month from the Geojit
Paribas and earning Rs.15,000/- per month, taking a contra stand in the
above M.C. seeking maintenance stating that she is getting only a meagre
sum of Rs.6,000/- is un-acceptable. Learned counsel appearing for the
appellant submitted that since the respondent has not disclosed about her
employment, the appellant is not able to get her pay slip.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1051 of 2018
6.Moreover, a perusal of the pay slip for August 2021 of the appellant
shows that he is getting net pay of Rs.74,771/-, after deduction of
Rs.3,540/- Rs.25,960, Rs.1,250/- and Rs.12,602/- towards Provident Fund,
Voluntary Provident Fund, Professional Tax and Income Tax respectively. A
perusal of statement of accounts filed by the appellant would also show that
the appellant was getting a sum of around Rs.40,000/-, after deduction of
Rs.22,000/- and odd towards housing loan.
7.In spite of service of notice to the respondent, she has not chosen to
appear before this Court, which shows that she is not prepared to contest
the case. Although we are not inclined to accept the submission made by the
learned counsel appearing for the appellant stating his difficulty in paying the
maintenance, we are inclined to direct the appellant to pay only a sum of
Rs.10,000/- to the respondent wife towards interim maintenance and the
tution fees directly to the Principal/Correspondent of D.A.V. School,
Velachery or any other school, in which, the child is pursuing his studies.
Accordingly, the appellant is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the
respondent wife towards interim maintenance and the tution fees directly to
the Principal/Correspondent of D.A.V. School, Velachery or any other school.
In the event of payment of such tution fees made by the appellant, the
Principal/Correspondent of the said School is permitted to receive the same,
as he is the father of the child. The appellant is further directed to pay
medical expenses and other incidental expenses of his son as and when
arises.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1051 of 2018
T.RAJA,J.
and
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
vga
8.Needless to mention that if any arrears of amount is payable by the
appellant, he is directed to pay the same at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per
month. Accordingly, the appeal stands partly allowed. No costs.
[T.R.,J.] [D.B.C.,J.]
24.11.2021
vga
To
1.The VI Additional Family Court, Chennai.
2.The Section Officer,
V.R. Section,
High Court, Madras.
C.M.A. No.1051 of 2018
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
