FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.147 OF 2008 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.45 OF 2008 ------------------------------------:---------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders. coram, appearances, Court’s orders : or directions and Registrar’s : orders. : ------------------------------------:----------------------------------- Mr Tejas Dande,for the applicant. Mrs Geeta Mulekar, for the respondent. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & D.B.BHOSALE,JJ. DATE : 15/09/2008 P.C.: Heard Mr Dande, the learned counsel for the applicant-wife who has filed F.C.A.No.45 of 2008 challenging the decree of divorce granted in favour of the repsondent-husband by the Family Court at Pune on 16.8.2008 under section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955. By this application, the wife is praying for interim maintenance pending her appeal and in the appeal the decree of divorce has been stayed. Mr Dande, the learned counsel for the applicant, submitted that during the pendency of the divorce petition registered as Petition No.A-995 of 2006 filed by the husband the applicant-wife was granted Rs.2500/- per month by way of interim maintenance by allowing the application at Exhibit-14 and the said order dated 12.7.2007 was not continued when the impugned decree of divorce was granted. As per Mr Dande the respondent-husband holds the qualifications of B.E. plus MBA and he has his own business at Pune and more particularly he claims to be running a laundry shop and drug shop. The respondent-husband has filed an affidavit opposing this application. Mrs Mulekar, the learned counsel for the husband, has invited our attention to the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class at Karamala and as per the same the wife is getting an amount of Rs.1500/- per month by way of maintenance under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. As directed by us on 25.8.2008 the arrears of maintenance, as directed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, have already been deposited with the Magistrate’s Court. Mrs Mulekar further submits that the laundry business is being run by the respondent-husband’s mother and drug shop is run by his sister and she, therefore, claims that as of now the respondent-husband has no independent source of income and despite his high qualifications he also does not have a job. On our specific query, Mr Dande stated that the applicant-wife is staying at Karamala which is a Taluka place with her father who is a retired primary teacher and he submitted that an amount of Rs.1500/- as of now is inadequate and, therefore, he prayed that the entire maintenance granted by the Family court should be continued. We have considered the rival submissions made before us and also the costs of living at a place like Karamala in Solapur District. Admittedly from the wedlock there is no child and the marriage hardly lasted for about one year. At the time we are satisfied that the wife cannot maintain herself in the sum of Rs.1500/- per month as has been directed to be paid by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class and she certainly needs something more than the said amount. At the same time we are not in favour of continuing the amount of Rs.2500/- per month as directed by the Family Court by way of interim maintenance in addition to the maintenance amount, the wife receives as of now. We are satisfied that an amount of Rs.2500/- per month would be sufficient for the wife to maintain herself. Hence, this application is partly allowed and we direct the respondent-husband to pay an additional amount of Rs.1000/- per month to the wife, over and above the amount of Rs.1500/- per month, i.e. presently he has been paying as per the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Karamala. This additional amount of Rs.1000/- shall be paid from 1.9.2008 and be deposited in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Karamala. This order is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the appeal as well as revision, if any. Liberty to apply for fixing an early date of hearing. (D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)