-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.184 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.257 OF 2007 AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO.276 OF 2008 Shyamsunder Narayan Angre .. Appellant. Vs. Rashmi Shyamsunder Angre & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.Ditendra Mishra for the appellant. Mr.E.K.Daver i/b A.S.Daver for the respondents. CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ. CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ. CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ. DATED : 22/09/2008 DATED : 22/09/2008 DATED : 22/09/2008 PC: PC: PC: . Heard Mr.Mishra, the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The appellant-husband has approached the Family Court and filed Petition No.A-562 of 2003 seeking divorce and Petition No.C-21 of 2003 was filed by the respondent-wife alongwith her minor daughter praying for maintenance. By the impugned judgment dated 3.7.2007 the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court was pleased to dismiss the husband’s petition and allowed the wife’s petition. Mr.Mishra states that separate appeal has been filed challenging dismissal of the husband’s petition seeking divorce and he clarified -2- that this appeal is limited to the challenge of payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.6,500/- per month to the wife and Rs.6,500/- to the minor daughter from the date of the order. 3. So far as the amount of maintenance is concerned, it was wife’s case before the Family Court that the husband was getting Rs.25,000/- per month as his salary. While in the witness box, the husband admitted that he was working as Mechanical Draftsman but denied that his monthly income was Rs.25,000/-. He claimed that his monthly salary was Rs.10,000/- but refused to submit a copy of his salary slip though he admitted that he receives salary slip every month, and even before us alongwith this appeal no such salary slip has been placed on record. He was maintaining a savings bank account but did not wish to name the bank as well the account number. He also refused to disclose the balance of such account. He also admitted that his family has landed property and that he has no other family member to look after it. Looking at his replies while in the witness box, the learned Principal Judge noted "The line which the husband adopted during the cross examination on the point of his income clearly indicates that he does not want to disclose his real income. In fact, he wants to conceal it from the -3- court". 4. It was under these circumstances the learned Principal Judge presumed monthly salary of the husband as Rs.20,000/- and leaving about Rs.7,000/- per month for the husband, distributed an amount of Rs.13,000/- between the petitioner-wife and her minor daughter. We do not find any infirmity or illegality or any error of jurisdiction in the reasons set out by the Family Court. This appeal must, therefore, fail at the threshold. 5. The appeal is dismissed in limine. 6. Civil applications does not survive and hence are disposed accordingly. 7. The amount deposited by the husband, if any, with the registry of this court be paid to the wife towards execution of decree. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)