1 306.10 SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.306 OF 2010 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.165 OF 2010 Mrs.Shivani Mehul Mehta ...Applicant Versus Mr.Mehul Vinod Mehta ...Respondent ...... Mr.Basil Menezes for Applicant. Ms.Sanober Nanavati for Respondent. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED:- APRIL 28, 2011. P.C. 1. This Application has been filed by the wife praying for direction to be issued to the respondent-husband to pay maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month to the applicant-wife and Rs.15,000/- per month to the minor child Siya. The wife had filed matrimonial Petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. In that Petition, she also prayed for permanent alimony for herself and maintenance for her daughter Siya and injunction against the husband restraining him from entering her parent’s place, return of streedhan articles from the husband and permanent custody of minor child Siya. The said Petition has been decreed by the Family Court in the following terms: 2 306.10 “1.The petition is partly allowed. 2. The marriage solemnized between the petitioner. Shivani Mehul Mehta and the respondent-Mehul Vinod Mehta is hereby dissolved by decree of divorce. 3. The respondent do pay permanent maintenance @ Rs.5,000/- per month to the petitioner and maintenance @ Rs.2,000/- per month for her child Siya, to the petitioner since the day of passing of this order. 4. The respondent is hereby restrained from causing obstruction to the possession of the petitioner over the flat/house No.B./1003, Kamla Vihar, Behind Mahavir Nagar, Kandivli (West), Mumbai – 400 067 and Flat No.6 Vidharbha Samrat, V.P.Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai 400 056 and entering in the said flat perpetually. 5. The permanent custody of daughter-Siya shall remain with the petitioner- mother. 7. The claim of the petitioner for her Streedhan is dismissed. 8.Decree be drawn up accordingly.” 2. In the present Application, the wife is seeking direction against the husband for payment of maintenance amount at enhanced rate of Rs. 15,000/- each for herself as well as Rs.15,000/- for her minor daughter who is in her custody as of now. It is noticed from the record that in the Petition filed by the wife by way of permanent alimony, she claimed amount of Rs. 13,000/- for herself and Rs.7,000/- for the child. During the pendency of the Petition, the husband was ordered to pay sum of Rs.5,000/- to the wife and Rs.2,000/- to the child towards maintenance. While finally disposing of the Petition, however, the Family Court has ordered the husband to pay 3 306.10 permanent maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the child Siya from the date of passing of the order dated 29th April, 2010. Insofar as maintenance amount to be paid to the minor child Siya, in the discussion we find that the Family Court was inclined to order payment of maintenance amount in the sum of Rs.5,000/- per month for child Siya. However, in the operative order, the amount has been reduced to Rs.2,000/- per month in that behalf. This appears to be a clerical mistake. Assuming that it is not a case of the mistake in the operative order, in our opinion, considering the monthly income of the husband in the sum of Rs.50,000/- to 60,000/- as has been found by the Family Court and which finding of fact has not been assailed before us, coupled with the fact that the child is growing and her requirements would also grow with regard to her education and maintenance, the applicant is entitled to succeed to that limited extent by directing the husband to pay monthly maintenance amount for the child Siya in the sum of Rs.5,000/- for the time being as was paid during the pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court. 3. Even if we were to consider the further claim of the applicant for enhancing the monthly maintenance amount to be paid to the child, the 4 306.10 question of directing the husband to pay amount in the sum of Rs.15,000/- per month would not arise as that relief would far exceed to the claim made in the original Petition only in the sum of Rs.7,000/- per month. As aforesaid, for the time being, we are inclined to direct the husband to pay monthly maintenance amount to the minor child Siya in the sum of Rs. 5,000/-. 4. Insofar as the claim of the applicant wife for monthly maintenance up to Rs.15,000/-, that claim cannot be countenanced. Inasmuch as, the Family Court has found as of fact that the wife is earning Rs.15,000/- per month. In other words, she is capable of earning and maintaining herself. The Counsel for the respondent-husband was at pains to persuade us to clarify that the husband should not be made liable to pay any maintenance amount to the wife. This argument will have to be stated to be rejected for the simple reason that the husband has not challenged the decree passed in favour of the wife which includes permanent maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- to be paid by the husband. 5. In the circumstances, we partly allow this Application by directing the respondent husband to pay monthly maintenance amount to minor child 5 306.10 Siya in the sum of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of this application i.e. 20th October, 2010. We make it clear that this liability of the husband is in addition to the monthly maintenance amount required to be paid to the wife in the sum of Rs.5,000/- in terms of decree dated 29th April, 2010. 6. At this stage, Counsel for the applicant submits that the respondent husband be directed to directly deposit the maintenance amount payable to the applicant wife as also to the minor child in terms of this order in Savings Account No.181104000022473 of IDBI Bank, Vile Parle Branch on or before 5th of every English Calender Month. We direct the respondent to observe this condition meticulously. Besides, the respondent husband shall deposit the arrears of maintenance payable to the minor child Siya in terms of this order on or before 5th June, 2011. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)