-: 1 :- wp-590 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 590 OF 2010 Asim Manoharlal Pahwa. ..Petitioner. Versus Mrs. Vibha Asim Pahwa. ..Respondent Ms. Chitra Phadke a/w Rutuja Ambekar for the petitioner. Ms. Shilpa Joshi for the respondent. Coram : R. V. MORE, J. Date : July 21, 2010. P. C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. Parties to the petition were married on 22nd November 2004. Out of the said wedlock, they have one daughter – Aamani. At the time of marriage, both parties were divorcee. Respondent had one son from his earlier marriage. 2. It is alleged that the petitioner behaved like maniac and was extremely violent. It was also alleged that on 15th May 2006 the petitioner wanted to throw the respondent out of the house. The respondent being scared called her parents at Faridabad and thereafter she left the matrimonial home alongwith her parents. The respondent filed Marriage Petition No. 269 of 2006 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane for dissolution of marriage. srp -: 2 :- wp-590 of 2010 3. The petitioner denied the allegations made in the marriage petition by the respondent. It is contended that the respondent is of quarrelsome nature and used to fight on trivial issues. It was further contended that at her own the respondent had left the matrimonial home and never returned back and started leaving at Navi Mumbai. The petitioner has also filed proceedings under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent. 4. The respondent in her petition for divorce, filed an application at Exhibit-5 under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, claiming interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per month for her self and Rs. 10,000/- per month for her daughter till final disposal of the marriage petition. It was claimed that the petitioner has flourishing business and has his own factory at Faridabad. He is manufacturer and dealer of thyristor drives and PLC panels. Before starting this factory, he was working in a multinational company. It was also contended that apart from this factory, he owns a house at Faridabad admeasuring 1700 square feet; price of the factory and house is about Rs.50,00,000/-. It is claimed that the petitioners’ estimated income is not less than 1,50,000/- per month. 5. The petitioner contested this application by submitting that he and his family live simple life. The petitioner’s parents and son are dependent -: 3 :- wp-590 of 2010 on him. It was also submitted that he cannot afford a lavish lifestyle as he has to repay the loan taken from his brother and some other financial institutions. He has to also bear expenses for medication of his aged parents, education of his son and payment of his employees. It is also contended that the respondent is educated woman and application under section 24 is made with an intention to extract money from the petitioner. In the above circumstances, it was claimed that the application be rejected. 6. The learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane after hearing both sides and considering the evidence on record, granted interim maintenance to the respondent – wife at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month and to her daughter at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per month, totaling to Rs.21,000/- per month. The litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- were also directed to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent. This order is challenged by the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having gone through the impugned order alongwith relevant documents, I find no merit in the petition. The bio-data of the petitioner is a matter of record. The educational qualification of the petitioner are B.Tech (Industrail Electronics). The bio-data mentions that the petitioner owns -: 4 :- wp-590 of 2010 a proprietorship concern, manufacturing and trading of electronic panels, which he supplied throughout India and abroad and he often visits abroad for his purpose. In the bio-data his income is mentioned as substantial. Perusal of the bio-data makes it further clear that the petitioner is leaving in a joint family in his independent portion (3 room covering 1700 Sq.ft.) and he is maintaining his own car and has all the amenities in his house. 8. It is not disputed by the petitioner that his son–Trishant is admitted in Vidhya Sanskar International School at Faridabad in Class-V. Trishant was taking education in the said school since 2006-09. The petitioner has incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.2,96,000/- on the education of Trishant in the year 2006-07, Rs.1,88,000/- in the year 2007-08 and Rs.1,88,000/- in the year 2008-09. Thus, the petitioner has spent approximately an amount of Rs.24,666/- per month for the education of Trishant in the year 2006-07, an amount of Rs.15,666/- per month during the years 2007 to 2009. The petitioner claims that his income is approximately Rs.2 lacs per annum, as reflected in the Income Tax Returns. However, in the light of the facts stated above, the income disclosed by the petitioner in his income tax returns cannot be believed. 9. It is the case of the petitioner himself that he was paying an amount of Rs.8,000/- per month to the respondent towards household -: 5 :- wp-590 of 2010 expenses. In addition to this, he used to pay Rs.1500/- per month towards fees for driving classes for her. A full time maid servant was also employed to assist the respondent. The petitioner also mentions the list of outstation trips headed to various places like Auli, Nainital, Bhimtal, Agra, Mathura, Haridwar, Rishikesh and Mumbai. The above said facts also speak volumes about the petitioner’s financial status. The petitioner's father was in Government service and after retirement he is getting good pension. Therefore, except Trishant nobody is dependent on the petitioner. The respondent, on the contrary, is staying at the mercy of her brother at Navi Mumbai. The petitioner could not point out any evidence to substantiate his case that the respondent has any source of income. The facts and circumstances mentioned above show that the petitioner belongs to an affluent background and is well capable of taking care of respondent and his daughter – Aamani. The respondent is entitled to lead, being the wife, a life similar to that of the petitioner. Taking overall view of the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration, I agree with the learned Court below. I find that the amount of interim maintenance fixed at Rs.15,000/- per month for the respondent and Rs.6,000/- per month for their daughter is just and reasonable and no interference is called for. In the circumstances, Writ Petition is dismissed. -: 6 :- wp-590 of 2010 10. The respondent wife is allowed to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner in this Court, without furnishing security. (R.V. MORE, J.)