Dheeraj Kumar v. Chhaya And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRR(F)-494-2019 Date of Decision:-26.9.2019 DHEERAJ KUMAR ... Petitioner

Versus

CHHAYA AND ANR ... Respondents *****

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL ***** Present:- Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate for the petitioner.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging order dated 3.6.2019 whereby the learned Trial Court has awarded maintenance to the tune of `3,000/- per month to the wife and another `3000/- per month to the child. 2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has additional responsibility of maintaining his parents and that his monthly expenditure works out to be much more inasmuch as he is paying a monthly rent of `1,023/- besides spending `9,000/- on groceries, `400/- on water, `2,000/- per month of electricity, `700/- per month on gas, `200/- on mobile phone and `300/- per month on T.V., internet etc., `1,000/- for maintaining his parents besides spending `2,000/- on petrol, `1200/- on insurance and GAURAV SOROT 2019.09.27 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRR(F)-494-2019 `5,300/- on repayment of loan apart from paying maintenance to his wife and his minor son.

3.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that keeping in view the expenses incurred by petitioner, as admitted above, even the wife and the minor son would be required to spend a substantial amount maintaining themselves by the same standards which would include expenditure incurred on groceries etc. As per Annexure P-1, the gross salary of petitioner is `20,090/- per month and after deductions which even include repayment of personal loan and vehicle loan, the net salary is `12,901/-. Keeping in view the salary of the petitioner, interim maintenance awarded by the learned Trial Court cannot be said to be on a higher side and is perfectly justified.

4.

The petition is sans any merit and is hereby dismissed. 5.

It is, however, clarified that none of the observations made above shall be construed to be an expression on merits of the main case and the trial Court shall proceed with the matter and decide the matter without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.

( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 26.9.2019 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No GAURAV SOROT 2019.09.27 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document