AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ravi Malimath, J.—This petition has been filed seeking to review the order dated 08.08.2011, wherein the order of the Family Court was modified and the petitioner-husband was directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 30,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.08.2011. Aggrieved by the same, he preferred an SLP (Civil) No. 1312-1313/2012, wherein by an order dated 30.01.2012 he was granted liberty to approach the learned Single Judge to file an application for review and that the review petition shall be considered on merits. Consequently, the delay in filing the review petition was condoned. The matter has been heard on merits. I have heard Sri. K. Varaprasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Geetha R. respondent who is present in the Court.
In terms of the order of this Court, the monthly maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Family Court was enhanced to a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month. On a petition being filed by the wife, the respondent-husband was served and unrepresented.
On the basis of the material produced, this Court was of the view that the claim of the wife that the husband is drawing a salary of Rs. 70,000/- per month and earning Rs. 30,000/- from his private practice was unchallenged. Since he did not contest the writ petition certain facts were not brought to the notice of the court. However, presently, a salary certificate of the husband has been produced for the month of September'' 2012, wherein his gross salary is Rs. 41,000/- and the net salary is Rs. 39,320/-. Thereafter, he has been sent on contract basis to Karnataka Health Systems Development and Reform Project, wherein he is drawing a salary of Rs. 45,000/-. Under these circumstances, the grant of monthly maintenance of Rs. 30,000/- per month in the face of material showing the income of the husband as far less, is a matter for review and therefore, calls for interference.
However, the respondent-wife pleads that her requirement is far beyond Rs. 20,000/- per month and she pleads for a greater amount. However, in view of the salary certificate of the petitioner and his gross salary at Rs. 40,000/- per month, it is only just and proper that he be directed to pay a monthly maintenance in a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per month to the respondent-wife. As and when the salary of the petitioner is enhanced, 50% of the same shall be paid till the disposal of M.C. No. 1259/2010. At this stage a memo is filed by the petitioner who is also present in the Court which states that he is regularly paying Rs. 15,000/- per month to the respondent and the child. The same is not disputed. The memo reads as follows:-
That the petitioner is regularly paying a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month to the respondent and the child. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- through Demand Draft No. 038014 dated: 23-7-2012 maintenance from the 1-8-2011 to 1-7-2012. It is submitted that from 1-7-2012 to till date the petitioner is required to pay a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- (From 1-7-2012 to till date). Hence, this Memo.
The same is not disputed by the respondent. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he requires two weeks from today to make the balance payment. At his request he is directed to make payment of sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- in cash at her request to the respondent wife for which she shall give an acknowledgement to him. The amount in-deposit in this Court in a sum of Rs. 1,65,000/- is directed to be released in favour of the respondent-wife.
For the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 8-8-2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 5816/2011 is recalled. The petitioner to make payment of Rs. 20,000/- per month to the respondent-wife with effect from this month onwards which means a payment of Rs. 20,000/- on 1st of October and on the subsequent dates till the disposal of M.C. No. 1259/2010. Ordered accordingly.