Madras High Court
Rajeswari .. Revision vs Senthilkumar on 3 September, 2021
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.09.2021
CORAM
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
and
C.M.P.No.5803 of 2017
Rajeswari .. Revision Petitioner
vs.
Senthilkumar ..Respondent
PRAYER:
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India against the fair and final order passed in C.M.A.No.2 of 2016 on the
file of Additional District Judge No.3, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District, dated
10.01.2017 partly allowing the I.A.No.40 of 2013 in H.M.O.P.No.54 of
2013 on the file of the Sub-Court, Udumalpet, dated 17.04.2014 and to set
aside the same.
For Revision Petitioner - M/s. B.Gopalakrishnan
For Respondent - Mr.NThiagarajan
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
ORDER
The appellant in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2 of 2016 on the
file of Additional District Judge No.3, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District (First
Appellate Court), is the revision petitioner herein.
2. The respondent/husband has filed a Petition for divorce, in
H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2013, on the file of the Sub-Court, Udumalpet(trial
Court), and the same is pending. In the said Petition for divorce, the
revision petitioner/wife filed an Interlocutory Application in I.A. No.40 of
2013 seeking for interim maintenance, pending disposal of the Divorce
Petition. The Trial Court disposed of the same with a direction to the
respondent/husband to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as interim maintenance to the
revision petitioner. The said order was challenged by the revision
petitioner/wife in C.M.A.No.2 of 2016. The said Appeal was partly
allowed by the First Appellate Court, vide judgment, dated 10.01.2017,
whereby, the maintenance amount awarded by the Trial Court was enhanced
from Rs.2000/- to Rs.3500/-. Challenging the said order, dated 10.01.2017,
the revision petitioner has preferred the present Civil Revision Petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
2. Mr.B.Gopalakrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the
revision petitioner submitted that originally, the revision petitioner/wife
made a claim of Rs.15,000/- per month towards interim maintenance, as she
has a male child to be looked after to, and therefore, maintenance amount
less than Rs.15,000/- will not be sufficient to meet out the monthly
expenditures. Further, the learned counsel submitted that the
respondent/husband is the owner of 12 acres of land, wherein, he has raised
coconuts, and that would fetch him around a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- per
month as income. Hence, the learned counsel prayed that without any
difficulties, the respondent/husband can pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month
as interim maintenance. However, this aspect was not considered by the
First Appellate Court in a proper perspective. Therefore, the learned counsel
prayed that the interim maintenance awarded by the First Appellate Court
may be enhanced atleast to Rs.10,000/- and the Civil Revision Petition may
be partly allowed.
3. Per contra, Mr.N.Thiagarajan, the learned counsel appearing for
the respondent/husband submitted that the respondent is the owner of land
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
only to an extent of 3.28 acres, and that apart, the entire extent of land has
not been yielding the coconuts. Therefore, the respondent/husband is not in
a position to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as claimed by the revision
petitioner/wife. Further, the learned counsel submitted that, the revision
petitioner has a major share over the family property, and from and out of
the said property, she is earning a sum of Rs. 25,000/- per month. Therefore,
the learned counsel submitted that, amount awarded by the First Appellate
Court of Rs.3,500/- is just and fair and it does not warrant interference of
this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the
materials available on record.
5. Originally, the Interlocutory Application was filed by the revision
petitioner/wife seeking interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month. The
main contention of the revision petitioner is that the respondent/husband
was owning 12 acres of coconut yielding grove, from and out of the same,
the respondent is earning Rs.2,00,000/- per month as income. Whereas,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
upon perusal of the counter affidavit by the respondent and on hearing the
learned counsel for the respondent/husband, it appears that the respondent is
entitled only to an extent of to 3.28 acres of land, and not 12 acres, and it
would fetch him around Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.3,00,000/- income per year, to
earn the said income, the respondent needs to spend a lot of money as well.
It is also admitted by both the parties that the respondent/husband is not
deriving any other income, except, from the aforesaid agricultural income.
In these circumstances, this Court is of the view that, it would be
appropriate to fix a Rs. 5000/- towards interim maintenance to the revision
petitioner/wife till the disposal of the Divorce Petition.
6. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to modify the interim
maintenance awarded by the First Appellate Court from a sum of Rs.3,500/-
to a sum of Rs.5,000/-. Therefore, the order dated 10.01.2017, passed by
the first Appellate Court in C.M.A.No.2 of 2016 stands modified to the
effect that the revision petitioner is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.5,000/- as
interim maintenance till the disposal of the Petition for divorce. The
revision petitioner is entitled for interim maintenance with effect from the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
date of filing of the Application for Maintenance. This Court, therefore,
directs the respondent/husband to pay the entire arrears of maintenance
within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case, the
respondent fails to pay the arrears of maintenance within the stipulated time,
then, he has to pay the same together with 12% interest to the revision
petitioner.
7. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is partly allowed. No
costs. Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
03.09.2021
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking Order
jd/sd
To
1. The III Additional District Judge, Dharapuram Court.
2. The Sub Court, Udumalpet.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
Krishnan Ramasamy, J.,
jd/sd
CRP (NPD)No.1228 of 2017
03.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
