Judicature For Rajasthan Bench High Court · 2011

Mr. Sudhir Jain, for petitioner None present for non petitioner This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner husband against the order of Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.4, Jaipur City, passed in the appellate jurisdiction, whereby the order of Judicial Magistrate No.9, Jaipur City, granting interim maintenance of Rs.1500/- under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 to the non petitioner and her two children, had been upheld. Brief facts are that the non petitioner wife had filed an application under Section 12 of the Act. During pendency of this application, the non petitioner wife filed an application under Section 23 of the Act praying for interim maintenance, which was contested by the petitioner stating that the non petitioner was a working woman and was getting a salary of Rs.7000/- and also getting LIC commission. The learned trial court, after appreciating the entire circumstances before it and the evidence, allowed the application, as against which an appeal under Section 29 of the Act was filed before the Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track), which was also - 2 - dismissed, upholding the order impugned. I have gone through the impugned orders. The learned trial court has granted Rs.1500/- for the wife and the two minor children as interim maintenance. The record of trial court also shows that the non petitioner wife is living in a rented accommodation with two children and some documents with regard to her treatment are also on record, whereas the main application is still pending. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any illegality or infirmity in the impugned orders, passed by the two courts below giving concurrent finding. In these days of inflation Rs.1500/- a month for the mother and her two minor kids, cannot be said to be an amount as exorbitant, and the matter is yet to be finally decided on the basis of evidence, to be led by both the parties. The revision, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. The stay application also stand disposed. (Dr. Meena V. Gomber) J. [All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.] Deepankar Bhattacharya PS