Divyanshu Jaiswal v. Smt. Ankita Jaiswal

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No. 877 of 2018 Divyanshu Jaiswal, aged about 36 years S/o Shri Virendra Kumar Jaiswal, presently resided at Flat No. 28, Second Floor, Shrinivas Residency, Near Balaji Mandir, Pasan- Pune (Maharashtra) Permanent R/o - Lakhanpur, P.S. Lakhanpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.).

--- Applicant

Versus

Smt. Ankita Jaiswal, aged about 32 years W/o Shri Divyanshu Jaiswal, through her father Jagdeesh Jaiswal, R/o Block Road, Near Animal Husbandry, Takhatpur, P.S. Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) - permanent resident of - through Dr. R.P. Tandan, Quarter No. 47, Geetanjali Vihar, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur, P.S. Civil Lines, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.). ---- Respondents For Applicant :

Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent :

None Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order on Board 17/09/2018 1.

Heard on admission.

2.

This revision has been preferred against the order dated 31/05/2018 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur whereby the Family Court has granted monthly interim maintenance of Rs. 15000/- in favour of Respondent/wife.

3.

Admittedly, the respondent is legally wedded wife of the applicant and presently she is residing separately from him, and she is unable to maintain herself. There is no dispute that the applicant is working with one Infosys company as software engineer and presently getting

monthly salary of Rs. 65000/-.

4.

The respondent/wife is residing separately with sufficient cause or not is matter of evidence. Since, she is the wife of the applicant, residing separately from him and is unable to maintain herself, therefore, she is entitled to get interim maintenance.

5.

After considering that the applicant is working with one Infosys Company and is getting monthly salary of Rs. 65000/- and the respondent is unable to maintain herself, the Family Court, Bilaspur granted monthly maintenance of Rs. 15000/- in favour of the respondent, which in my considered opinion is just and proper.

6.

Considering the above aspects of the matter, I do not find any merit in this revision. The revision is dismissed at the motion stage itself. Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Rahul