Orissa High Court
Debashis Mekap vs Mamina Mekap on 13 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MATA No. 10 of 2021 & MATA No. 41 of 2020
MATA No. 10 of 2021
Debashis Mekap ......... Appellant
Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate
Versus
Mamina Mekap .......... Respondent
Ms. S. Jena, Advocate
MATA No. 41 of 2020
Mamina Mekap ......... Appellant
Ms. S. Jena, Advocate
Versus
Debashis Mekap .......... Respondent
Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
13.01.2023
Order No.
19.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard Mr. P.K. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the
Appellant in MATA No. 10 of 2021 and the Respondent in MATA
No. 41 of 2020 and Ms. S. Jena, learned counsel appearing for the
Respondent in MATA No. 10 of 2021 and the Appellant in MATA
No. 41 of 2020.
3. In both these appeals, the judgment dated 05.02.2020
delivered in C.P. (MAT) No. 46/125 of 2019-15 by the Judge,
Family Court, Keonjhar has been challenged.
4. By the said judgment, the Appellant of MATA No. 10 of
2021 has been directed to pay Rs.10,000/- per month to the
Respondent for her maintenance from the date of application i.e.
25.09.2015.
5. In the appeal being MATA No. 10 of 2021, the Appellant
(husband) has contended that the said amount is unreasonable and it
requires to be reduced. In the other appeal being MATA No. 41 of
2020, the Appellant (wife) has contended that the said amount is not
only inadequate but she cannot live a life of dignity with her son who
is born in the wedlock of the Appellant and the Respondent.
6. Ms. S. Jena, learned counsel has put on record the various
ITRs starting from the assessment year of 2015-2016 till date i.e.
2022-2023. At the same time, the Appellant in MATA No. 10 of
2021 has also submitted the ITR for the assessment year 2020-2021.
From the ITR for the assessment year 2020-2021, it appears that the
Appellant in MATA No. 10 of 2021 has returned an income of
Rs.15,20,850/-. Ms. Jena, learned counsel has seriously controverted
that one year's returned income cannot be the basis for deciding his
income. This court should look into the other ITRs. She has
intimatyed to submit the ITR for the assessment year 2018-2019, the
Appellant in MATA No. 10 of 2021 has returned the income of
Rs.51,52, 033/-.
7. We have come across the ITR for the assessment year of
2017-2018 where the income of the Appellant in MATA No. 10 of
2021 has been declared as Rs.6,058,121/-. In the ITR for the
assessment year of 2019-2022, the returned income of the Appellant
in MATA No. 10 of 2021 was Rs.19,89,958/-. Cumulatively those
ITRs indicates to the monthly income of the Appellant in MATA No.
10 of 2021. On average, the Appellant is earning more than Rs.1
lakh in a month. His annual income bulges more than that amount in
some years.
8. Having observed thus, we agree with Ms. S. Jena, learned
counsel appearing for the Appellant in MATA No. 41 of 2020 that
the amount that has been determined as the monthly maintenance
allowance under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and
Maintenance Act for the Appellant in MATA No. 41 of 2020 is
inadequate and requires interference.
9. Having taken the material factors into consideration, we
consider it fit that the maitenance should be enhanced to Rs.25,000/-
(rupees twenty five thousand only) per month which shall be paid
within the 10th day of every English Calender month. We also direct
that the said amount shall be paid with effect from 25.09.2015.
10. It has been brought to our notice that an amount of Rs.7
lakhs has been paid to the Appellant of MATA No. 41 of 2020.
Needless to say that while calculating the arrears of the maintenance,
the said amount shall be adjusted.
11. In terms of the above, the appeal being MATA No. 10 of
2021 filed by the husband stands dismissed whereas the appeal filed
by the wife being MATA No. 41 of 2020 is allowed.
12. Registry is directed to prepare the decree accordingly.
13. If the LCRs have been received, those shall be returned.
14. The entire arrear amount after adjustment, as noted above,
shall be paid within a period of 6 months from today.
15. The decree as will be drawn shall be treated as money
decree.
16. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(S. Talapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
puspa Judge
