)
DEEPAKJAIN
A
v.
CHARU JAIN
MARCH 14, 2007
[DR AR LAKSHMANAN AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.]
B
Hindu Marriage Act, 1956:
s.24 -
Interim maintenance-Held, order of trial court granting
Rs.12,0001- per month as interim maintenance and Rs.11,0001- as litigation C
expenses as affirmed by High Court suffers from no infirmity.
The instant appeal was filed against the order of the High Court
affirming the order of the Additional District Judge in an application under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, granting interim maintenance D
at the rate of Rs.12,000/- per month together with litigation expenses of
>
Rs.11,000/-.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: The order under challenge suffers from no infirmity. The E
interim order passed by this Court on 17.2.2006 directing the appellant to
pay a sum of Rs.8000/- per month to the respondent is vacated. The appellant
would pay the entire balance amount to the respondent. (1040-F)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1404 of2007.
F
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.1.2006 of the High Court of Delhi
at New Delhi in CM (M) No. 1720/2004.
WITH
Contempt Petition No. (C) No. 221 of2006.
G
Prabhakaran and S. Rajappa for the Appellant.
M.N. Krishnamani and Rajinder Mathur for the Respondent.
1039
H
1040
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(2007] 3 S.C.R.
A
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. I. Leave granted.
2. Heard Mr.Prabhakaran assisted by Mr.S.Rajappa, learned counsel for
the appellant and Mr.M.N.Krishnamani, learned senior counsel for the
B respondent.
3. The above appeal is directed against the order dt. I 0.01.2006 passed
by the High Court of Delhi in CM(M) No, 1720 of 2004. The said Civil
Miscellaneous Appeal was filed before the Delhi High Court against the order
c
of Addi.District Judge, Delhi in H.M.A.Case No. 149 of 2003 whereby the said
court had disposed of the application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu
Marriage Act and fixed an interim maintenance at the rate of 12,000/- per
month from the date offiling of the application together with litigation expenses
of Rs.11,000/-. Aggrieved against the said order, CM(M) No.1720/2004 has
been filed before the Delhi High Court. The High Court on considering all
D the averments made in the pleadings and also taking into consideration all the
other annexures etc. came to the conclusion that the trial court has rightly
arrived at a conclusion that Rs.12,000/- should be paid by way of interim
maintenance.
4. We have also carefully perused the impugned order and annexures
E and heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both sides. In
our opinion, the order under challenge suffers from no infirmity. We, therefore,
have no hesitation in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant-husband.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
5. During the pendency of this appeal, this Court as an 'interim measure
{
).
~
F on 17.02.2006, directed the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- per
"'
month to the respondent from the date of the filing of the application and
continue to pay till the disposal of this appeal. In view of the fact that the
appeal is being dismissed, the said interim order is vacated and the appellant
will now be liable to pay the entire amount pursuant to the order of ADJ,
G Delhi.
6. It is stated that the said interim order passed by this Court has also
not been complied with. We direct the appellant to pay the entire balance
amount to the respondent, if any, within two weeks from today.
H
7. In view of the Order now passed, the Contempt Petition is also
"'
..
DEEP AK JAIN v. CHARU JAIN [LAKSHMANAN, J.)
1041
dismissed.
8. We direct the trial court to dispose of H.M.A.Case No.149 of 2003
within three months from today.
No costs.
RP.
Civil Appeal & Cont. Petition dismissed.
A
B
Lex