F.A. No.71 of 2006
Smt. Chameli Bai Sunil Kumar.
26.7.2010
Shri J.K. Verma, Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Sidharth Datt, Counsel for the respondent.
I.A.No.3595/10 for modification of order dated
14.11.2006.
By order dated 14.11.2006 this Court considering
I.A.529/2006 directed that the respondent shall pay Rs.3,000/- per
month as maintenance pendente lite and Rs.2,500/- by way of
litigation expenses. For ready reference order dated 14.11.2006 is
quoted thus :-
“Heard on I.A. No.529/2006.
It is submitted that gross emoluments of Sunil
Kumar, husband as per his version which he is receiving
approximately Rs.15,000/- and as per wife it is
Rs.17,051/-. Wife is receiving a sum of Rs.1200/- only
for her maintenance at present which is considered to be
inadequte amount to meet the day to day expenditure
and for maintenance of the wife Smt. Chameli Bai.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is
considered appropriate to direct the husband to make the
payment of sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife for
her maintenance during pendency of these appeals.
Appeal by wife was filed on 10.1.2006, thus, the
aforesaid maintenance shall be payable w.e.f. the month
of January,2006. The arrears be worked out and be paid
within 2 months. Monthly maintenance shall be paid by
10th day of each succeeding month. Litigant expenditure
is quantified as Rs.2500/- that shall also be paid within 2
months. I.A.No.529/2006 stands disposed of.”
It is submitted by the appellant that at the time of passing
of the order dated 14.11.2006, the respondent was getting
Rs.15,000/- per month. Now the salary of the respondent has
increased and the gross salary is Rs.36,000/- p.m., while the net
salary is Rs.25,762/- p.m. So the amount of maintenance
pendente lite may be enhanced to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per
month and Rs.5000/- be allowed as litigation expenses.
Prayer made in the application is vehemently opposed by
Shri Datt, counsel for the respondent.
On being asked specifically, whether the salary of the
F.A. No.71 of 2006
Smt. Chameli Bai Sunil Kumar.
26.7.2010
respondent has increased to the extent of Rs.25,762/- p.m., this
factual position is not disputed by the respondent. The salary of
the respondent has increased to Rs.25,762/-p.m. at present, while
on the date of passing of order dated 14.11.2006 his salary was
Rs.15,000/-p.m., we find it appropriate to enhance the
maintenance pendente lite to the extent of Rs.5000/- p.m.in place
of Rs.3,000/- p.m. and accordingly we direct that the maintenance
pendente lite be increased to the appellant from Rs.3000/- to
Rs.5000/-. This order shall be applicable for the maintenance
payable to the appellant from the month of February,2010 and
thereafter. So far as the litigation expenses are concerned, we do
not find any reason to interfere in the order dated 14.11.2006.
This prayer of the appellant is rejected.
With the aforesaid directions I.A.3595/10 is finally disposed
of.
C.C. as per rules.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Sanjay Yadav)
JUDGE JUDGE
vj.