- 1 - rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.181 OF 2009 in FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.126 OF 2009 Mamta Jitendra Kacha ... Applicant vs Jitendra Dhiraj Kacha ..Respondent .. Mr.P.M.Bhansali a/w Mr.V.K.Narkar for Applicant Mr.A.G.Toraskar for Respondent. Applicant and Respondent present CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR AND R.V.MORE,JJ DATED: September,16, 2009 P.C.: 1. First Appeal is already admitted by this Court. This Civil Application is preferred for granting interim alimony during the pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is having a child of 6 years old and she is required to spend for her education. She further submitted that it is not possible to find what is the exact income of the respondent as he is receiving income in cash. According to her, he is doing interior decoration work. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that he is only doing labour work by engaging himself in fixing tiles at the newly constructed flats. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that during the - 2 - pendency of the family court proceedings, he used to pay Rs.1500/- per month i.e. Rs.1000/- for the applicant-wife and Rs/.500/- for the child. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length regarding the interim maintenance. In our view, the child is not required to face starvation simply because dispute is going on between the applicant and the respondent. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that she is willing to go and reside with the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the husband it appears is not willing to take the applicant with him as they have been separated since long. 3. In a given case, even though there may not be direct evidence of income of the husband because, it may not be available the Court may resort to guess work. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the respondent- husband used to pay Rs.1500/- per month during the pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the respondent-husband is having a mobile phone and was having two vehicles i.e. Scooters. Learned counsel for the respondent has denied the said fact. Since there is nothing on record to show that the respondent was having two vehicles, this Court cannot presume the same. - 3 - However, considering the fact that Rs.1500/- has paid during the family court proceedings is too inadequate for the wife to survive when there is a small child who is looked after by the applicant-wife and it is not in dispute that the respondent is doing work of fitting tiles in newly constructed flats, and considering the above facts, we direct the respondent to pay Rs.3000/- towards the maintenance of the child and the same amount to the applicant-wife. Thus, in all Rs.6000/- per month till the appeal is finally decided. Considering the above circumstances, hearing of the appeal is expedited. Civil Application is disposed of. R.V.More, J P.B.Majmudar, J - 4 -