High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 03 MAD CK 0040

M.Srinivasan vs S.Leelavathy

Madras High Court · Decided on 27 March 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.Duraiswamy
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
1123 of 2017 and C M P No 5402 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 272 words
1.

Challenging the order passed in I.A.No.222 of 2016 in H.M.O.P.No.310 of 2014 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Ponnamallee, the

petitioner, who is the husband of the respondent, has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

2.

The respondent/wife filed H.M.O.P.No.310 of 2014 for divorce on the ground of cruelty.

3.

The petitioner/husband filed his counter and is contesting the Original Petition.

4.

In the said Original Petition, the respondent/wife filed an application in I.A.No.222 of 2016 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act

claiming an interim maintenance for Rs.8,000/- per month and a sum of Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.

5.

It is not in dispute that the respondent has got a girl child, aged about 4 years now. Admittedly, the minor child is with the respondent/wife. The

petitioner took a defence that he is working as a Welder, earning a sum of Rs.6,000/- to Rs.8,000/- per month. As a husband of the respondent,

the petitioner is bound to maintain his wife and his minor child.

6.

The Trial Court, taking into consideration the case of both parties, awarded a sum of Rs.4,000/- as monthly maintenance and a sum of

Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses. The award of Rs.4,000/- towards monthly maintenance is very reasonable taking into consideration the

present days cost of living. The respondent/wife is also maintaining her minor daughter and therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the

order passed by the trial Court.

7.

The Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.