Ashish Shukla v. Sonia

-1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision.26.03.2019 Ashish Shukla

...Petitioner

Vs Sonia .Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Vaibhav Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the respondent.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) C.M. No.4271-CII of 2019 Application is allowed.

Photocopy of statement of account of petitioner from 27.09.2018 to 15.02.2019 is taken on record as Annexure A-2. C.M. No.4272-CII of 2019 Application is allowed.

Photocopy of statement of respondent dated 15.10.2018 is taken on record as Annexure A-1.

C.R. No.5691 of 2018 In pursuance of order dated 14.03.2019, both the parties are present in the Court.

Mediation proceedings were initiated by this Court but husband is not willing to keep the wife and wants to part ways. A proposal for permanent alimony was also put forth but wife did not agree.

The present revision petition is directed against the

-2impugned order dated 10.08.2018 (Annexure P-1) whereby in divorce petition filed by the petitioner in respect of marriage solemnized on 24.06.2012, maintenance pendente lite @`10,000/- per month has been granted along with litigation expenses of `5500/-. Mr. Vaibhav Sehgal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that after marriage, petitioner has upgraded himself by seeking higher qualification. He is Masters in Computer Application. Before June, 2016, he was drawing a salary of `29,000/- per month but as per the termination orders dated 30.06.2016, 30.06.2017 and statement of account (Annexure A-2) enclosed with C.M. No.4271-CII of 2019, his income at present is `13,200/- per month.

Divorce petition was filed on 16.08.2017. Parents of both parties are labourers in a dry port and collect wooden box. Keeping in view the standard of family, the maintenance aforementioned is on higher side.

Mr. Amit Dhawan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that keeping in view the education qualification of the petitioner, it cannot be believed that petitioner is drawing a salary of `13,200/- per month. It is an intentional act of reduction in the salary owing to pre-conceived notion as divorce petition was filed two months after the last termination order, thus, urges this Court for dismissal of the revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. Though authenticity and veracity of the documents cannot be looked into as they have been filed by way of

-3application accompanied with affidavits, in essence, have not been proved in accordance with law. Be that as it may, education qualification of the petitioner is not in dispute and the previous salary of `29,000/-. Keeping in view the present status of the parties, particularly, when the wife and husband are living separately, present salary certificate of `13,200/- per month cannot be treated as sermon to reduce the amount of maintenance pendente lite considerably. Keeping in view the present scenario, I deem it appropriate to modify the order of maintenance from `10,000/- to `8,000/-. The stay granted by this Court is vacated. Petitioner is directed to pay arrears of maintenance within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, failing which the respondent would have right to seek arrears in accordance with law. The impugned order is modified to the above extent and the revision petition stands disposed of in above terms. (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE March 26, 2019 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No