Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhawani Shankar Siddha vs Monika Tanwar (2025:Rj-Jd:36688-Db) on 18 August, 2025
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:36688-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2206/2024
Bhawani Shankar Siddha S/o Shri Rajendra Prasad Siddha, Aged
About 35 Years, By Caste Sain, R/o House No.210, Pratapnagar
Extension, Near Jamunapuri Basti, Murlipura, Jaipur, Tehsil And
District Jaipur, Having Its Office At Assistant Commandant C.r.o.
Nayla, I.g. Office, C.r.p.f., Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Appellant
Versus
Monika Tanwar W/o Bhawani Shankar Siddha, D/o Shri Ranjeet
Kumar Tanwar, Aged About 31 Years, By Caste Sain, R/o Ward
No.10, Near Loko Masjid, Gandhinagar, Hanumangarh Junction,
Tehsil And District Hanumangarh.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pradeep Singh Khichi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sushil Bishnoi with
Mr. Rahul Mandan.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI
Judgment / Order
18/08/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated
12.06.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, Hanumangarh,
whereby, the application preferred by the respondent under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred
to as 'the Act of 1955') has been allowed.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
application preferred by the respondent has been decided by the
learned Court below by passing an order to pay Rs.30,000/- per
month as maintenance during pendency of the application
[2025:RJ-JD:36688-DB] (2 of 4) [CMA-2206/2024]
preferred under Section 9 of the Act of 1955. He further submits
that the learned Court below has decided the application without
taking the affidavits from both the parties as mandated by
Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha
& Anr., reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the matter
may be remanded back to the learned Family Court, Hanumangarh
for deciding the application preferred under Section 24 of the Act
of 1955 afresh after following the mandate of judgment rendered
in the case of Rajnesh (supra). Learned counsel for the appellant
agrees that the arrears due till date have not been completely
paid by the appellant and, therefore, he undertakes to pay an
amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on or before 30.08.2025 and thereafter,
he shall continue to pay Rs.30,000/- to the respondent till the
disposal of the application preferred under Section 24 of the Act of
1955.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to
refute the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant,
however, he submits that the right of the respondent to recover
the arrears may be kept open and if the amount is increased or
decreased after decision of the application under Section 24 of the
Act of 1955, the balance of the arrears may be directed to be paid
to her. He further submits that the learned Court below may be
directed to decide the application within a stipulated period of
time.
6. We have considered the submissions made at the bar and
have gone through the relevant record of the case.
[2025:RJ-JD:36688-DB] (3 of 4) [CMA-2206/2024]
7. It is noted that the order dated 12.06.2024 has been passed
by the learned Family Court, Hanumangarh without taking the
affidavits from both the parties and, therefore, the mandate of the
judgment of Hon'ble The Supreme Court rendered in the case of
Rajnesh (supra) has not been followed.
8. To appreciate the correct facts and to arrive at a correct
decision for award of maintenance during pendency of the
litigation, the steps provided in the judgment of Hon'ble The
Supreme Court in the case Rajnesh (supra) are required to be
adhered to.
9. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the
present civil misc. appeal merits acceptance and the same is
allowed. The order dated 12.06.2024 passed by the learned
Family Court, Hanumangarh is not sustainable and thus, the same
is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the
learned Family Court, Hanumangarh with a direction to decide the
same after taking the affidavits from both the parties and
following the steps as mentioned in the judgment rendered by
Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh (supra).
10. It is further ordered that the appellant shall pay an amount
of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the arrears of maintenance on or before
30.08.2025 and thereafter, shall continue to pay an amount of
Rs.30,000/- till the application under Section 24 of the Act of 1955
is decided by the learned Family Court, Hanumangarh. It is also
ordered that the learned Family Court shall decide the application
preferred under Section 24 of the Act of 1955 expeditiously,
preferably on or before 15.10.2025.
[2025:RJ-JD:36688-DB] (4 of 4) [CMA-2206/2024]
11. After the decision of the application preferred under Section
24 of the Act of 1955, if the amount awarded for interim
maintenance undergoes a change, then the differential amount
shall be paid by the appellant in accordance with the order passed
by the learned Family Court, Hanumangarh.
12. The parties shall furnish their affidavits before the learned
Court below on or before 28.08.2025.
13. The consequential orders passed in pursuance of the order
dated 12.06.2025 shall be kept in abeyance till 15.10.2025.
(ANUROOP SINGHI),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
15-Shahenshah/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
