LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

MAINTENANCE

If wife is refusing for any kind of intimacy and s*exual relation with husband, not even listening to her parents. If her mother is trying to spent some time with them at couples place, she is insisting to live in a rented accommodation for which she has consulted with some lawer and with that knowledge she is telling that she is eligible for 25% of her husband’s salary and telling her husband to provide her a separate rented accomodation enabling her to live there alone.

 

Not listening to anything just adamant either to live alone or live under one roof without any relationship as husband and wife. Its his 2nd marriage of 4 years old having 3 kids from his deceased wife and no issue from this wife.

 

If Law is totally against her husband as I came to know from various posts here that husband’s  pleas whether they are right or wrong did’nt carry any weight in eyes of Law.

 

I want to know how much she will be eligible as Maintenance as per following data.

 

Thanks,

 

 

Gross Salary

 

40000

Less : Deductions

 

 

 

EPF

4200

 

 

TDS

1000

 

 

EMI of Car

5202

10402

Take Home Pay

 

29598

 

 

 

 

Other Loans

 

 

 

Home Loan EMI

4850

 

 

Personal Loan EMI

5060

 

 

Personal Loan EMI

3550

13460

BALANCE

 

16138

 

 

 

 

School & Tution Fee for 3 Children

6000

 

 

 

10138

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Learning

 14 Replies

hedevil hydraheaded (non professional )     04 November 2010

Mine is just reply of some part of your query. There is a judgment against showing too many deductions. I have to hunt for it and I will post it here. Once I had read this judgement on the LCI only. I remember the judgement clearly says that the husband has to cope with the consequences of too many deductions in the name of Personal EMI etc. etc. If someone has this judgement please post it for the benefits of readers. Too many deductions can be manipulated to lower the income to avoid interim maintenance.

Now please I am not commenting on that part of your query where you have mentioned the conduct of your wife. That is for the court to decide after hearing her side of the story also. 

I am not an advocate and my views are based on the said judgement which I will be posting very soon if you are not able to locate it on the family forum.

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate)     04 November 2010

To get the maintenance wife has to prove that husband willfully neglected to maintain her then only she would get the maintenance, otherwise no.


(Guest)

THERE IS NO QUESTION OF HUSBAND NEGLECTING TO MAINTAIN HER, WHAT ABOUT IF SHE IS STILL ADAMANT IN THE HOME AND BARRING HER MOTHER TO VISIT AND STAY FOR SOME TIME WITH THEM IN THEIR HOME, NOT HAVING ANY RELATIONSHIP AS A WIFE. IF ANY REMEDY AVAILABLE FOR HUSBAND BECAUSE HE IS TRYING TO CONVINCE HER FOR NORMAL RELATIONS WITH THE HELP OF HER PARENTS. WHICH SHE IS AVOIDING.

CONSULTING SOME  ADVOCATE FOR MAINTENAINCE WITHOUT ANY CLEAR CONCEPT AND GETTING IMMATURE SUGGESTIONS AS TOLD BY HER MAY BE ITS A BRAINCHILD OF ANYONE OF HER FEMALE FRIENDS.

SIRS, ANY REMEDY FOR HUSBAND AS PER LAW, THEY ARE NOT LIVIG SEPERATE SO NO QUESTION OF RCR, BUT NOT LIVING LIKE A COUPLE.

 

hedevil hydraheaded (non professional )     04 November 2010

Ok here comes the judgement I promised to place here. Just see those portions( marked in red)  which speak on the reasonability of deductions. Ofcourse this judgement may have its own limitation, but then the logic can be used by your wife to show the unreasonableness of your deductions.

CA/6911/2004 4/4 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6911 OF 2004

In

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1723 OF 2004

==============================================================

RITABEN ASHWINKUMAR PARMAR - Applicant(s)

Versus

ASHWINKUMAR MANILAL PARMAR - Opponent(s)

============================================================== Appearance :

MR. JAYESH A. DAVE for Applicant(s).

MR. H.R. PRAJAPATI for Opponent(s).

=====================================================================

CORAM :

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG

and

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.MEHTA

Date : 10/10/2005

ORAL ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG)

1. The parties are heard.

2. This is an application under Section-24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking interim maintenance.

3. The wife has submitted that as her husband's salary is Rs.13,000/- plus, the Court be pleased to award a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month towards the interim maintenance during pendency of the appeal. It is also submitted that the Court below, in a most cruel and indecent manner, awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards permanent alimony, less realising that the interest at the present Bank's rate would be hardly Rs.150/- per month, that would be Rs.5/- per day and in a sum of Rs.5/- per day, it is impossible to maintain even a pet. It is also submitted that if Rs.5,000/- are needed and the said amount is used by the wife out of the permanent alimony, then, the total amount of permanent alimony would exhaust in six months and she would be left with nothing and will have to go for vagrancy.

4. Learned Counsel for the respondent-husband has filed an affidavit of the husband opposing the application. It is submitted in the affidavit that the gross salary is Rs.13,753.74, out of which the total deductions are Rs.7,896.94 and his take home salary is Rs.5,855.31; out of the said take home salary, he has to maintain his old and infirm father, the wife, with whom he has married after grant of decree of divorce, and the son begotten out of the second marriage.

5. Prima facie, the submission of the Counsel for the respondent-husband about the deduction of Rs.7,896.94 from the gross salary appears to be reasonable and lucrative, but, if a close scrutiny is made against the items of deductions, then, it would clearly appear that except Rs.333/- deducted towards income tax and Rs.886/- deducted towards provident fund, which are the standard deductions, all other deductions are towards the earlier loan taken by the husband or towards the interest of the loan taken by the husband. The moment a person takes a loan, then, he virtually withdraws the salary in advance and pays interest on it. The deduction from the future salary has to compensate what has been withdrawn by the husband in advance. If, out of the take home salary, the husband wants to pay for LIC premium, housing loan, supplementary loan and the loan taken from the credit society, then, he can't be allowed the luxuries to have everything in the life and say before the Court that his take home salary is so low that he can't pay reasonable amount to the wife.

6. It was submitted by the parties that on an earlier occasion, the wife had demanded a sum of Rs.1.75 lakhs towards permanent alimony with an undertaking or assurance to withdraw the appeal, but, the husband only wanted to pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh in lump sum. We asked Mr.Prajapati to seek further instructions from the respondent, who was present in the Court, but, the respondent says that he would prefer to pay the monthly alimony and not a sum of Rs.1.75 lakhs, as demanded by the wife.

7. Left with no choice, we grant the application with a direction that from the date of the application, the husband shall pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- per month to the wife towards maintenance. If the husband does not pay this amount to the wife directly or through the agency of the Court, then, the wife shall be entitled to submit an application to the employer of the husband, along with a copy of this order for making particular deductions in the salary and for paying the amount to the wife, until further orders from this Court. The application is allowed. Rule is made absolute. No costs.

[R.S.Garg, J.]

[K.M. Mehta, J.]

kamlesh*

 

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     04 November 2010

explain need for personal loans. no fooding clothing/other expenses of three children? which state. what is qualification of wife. standard of living of husband?

hedevil hydraheaded (non professional )     05 November 2010

: If, out of the take home salary, the husband wants to pay for LIC premium, housing loan, supplementary loan and the loan taken from the credit society, then, he can't be allowed the luxuries to have everything in the life and say before the Court that his take home salary is so low that he can't pay reasonable amount to the wife.

And there are people around who will build your capacities to  become a Rehadiwala, Khomachewala and Chai wala....

All the best....

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     05 November 2010

only mandatory deductions like income tax, minimum epf and housing loan , dependent old parents/necessary medical expenses are deducted . if not in govt service , then definitely try hydraheaded advise of rehdiwala etc. etc.

hedevil hydraheaded (non professional )     05 November 2010

It's not my advice . It is the advice of some member/s here on this forum. I have forgotten their names and that of thread title. But more than once they have said, come to SIFF to get yourself transformed into Rehadiwala, Khomchewala and Chaiwalals....

So II am not the author of this advice, credit goes elesewhere!

Parth Chandra (none)     08 November 2010

Though I have already posted this SC judgement in one of my post "Judgement helping Innocent husbands", I would like to repost & attach it against the Gujarat HC judgement posted by one of my friend.


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 879 OF 2009
[Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.7503 of 2008]

BHUSHAN KUMAR MEEN

Versus

MANSI MEEN @ HARPREET KAUR

WITH

SLP(Crl.)No.7924 of 2008

...

Appellant(s)

... Respondent(s)

ORDER

Leave is granted in SLP(C) No.7503 of 2008.

This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1 st July,

2008, passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Crl.Misc.No.14793-M of 2008,

whereby the appellant's application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure for quashing the orders dated 25th July, 2007 and 6th November, 2007

passed by the courts below granting Rs.10,000/- per month, as interim maintenance to

the respondent-wife, was dismissed.

Taking into consideration the evidence adduced, the learned Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, before whom the proceedings under Section 125 of the

Criminal Procedure Code, filed by the respondent-wife is pending, directed the

appellant-husband to pay the said sum of Rs.10,000/- by way of interim maintenance

to the respondent-wife during the pendency of the proceeding. The said order was

2

affirmed both by the Sessions Court as well as the High Court.

Before us, the appellant-husband, who is appearing in person, has shown that

his salary certificate had been produced before the Magistrate, from which it appears

that he was drawing approximately Rs.34,900/- per month towards his salary, out of

which various deductions were being made, including a deduction of Rs.21,329/-

towards the home loan which he had obtained, leaving in his hand as takeaway salary

a sum of about Rs.9000/-.

The appellant has submitted that in that view of the matter, the amount as

awarded by the Magistrate to the respondent-wife was not justifiable.

The appellant-husband has also taken another point regarding the

maintainability of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on account of the ability

of the respondent-wife to maintain herself.

On behalf of the respondent-wife, it has been urged that having regard to the

net salary, which the appellant is entitled to take home, the amount as assessed by way

of interim maintenance by the Magistrate and as upheld by the Sessions Judge as well

as the High Court, could not be said to be excessive and that the fact that the appellant

had taken the home loan which has been adjusted against the salary, is no

consideration for altering the said amount, as had been granted by the learned

Sessions Judge.

As far as the second point taken by the appellant is concerned, it was submitted

that the same required evidence and had to be to ultimately decided by the Magistrate

while deciding the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C..

Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, and considering the

reality of the situation to the effect that the appellant is receiving a sum of about

Rs.9000/- in hand after deduction of various amounts, including the instalments

3

towards repayment of the home loan, we are of the view that the amount as awarded

by way of interim maintenance is on the high side. At the same time, we cannot also

shut our eyes to the fact that at present the respondent-wife is not employed or at least

there is nothing on record to indicate she is employed in any gainful work. However,

having regard to the qualifications that she possesses, there is no reason why she ought

not to be in a position to also maintain herself in the future.

Accordingly, we modify the order passed by the learned Magistrate, granting

Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent-wife by way of interim maintenance and

direct that the appellant-husband shall pay to the respondent-wife a sum of Rs.5000/-

per month, instead of Rs.10,000/-, and all other terms and conditions, as indicated by

the learned Magistrate, will continue to operate.

We are informed that there are huge arrears, which are yet to be paid by the

appellant-husband to the respondent-wife. The learned Magistrate shall recalculate

the amount of arrears on the basis of the order passed today and the appellant-

husband shall within three months of the re-assessment of the amount, pay the sum to

the respondent-wife, if necessary, in three installments, to be decided by the learned

Magistrate.

We make it clear that we have not gone into the question as to what would be

the amount payable by way of maintenance per month to the respondent-wife and this

is only an interim arrangement till the matter is finally disposed of by the learned

Magistrate. We also keep open the second question raised by the husband-wife

regarding the applicability of Section 125 Cr.P.C. as far as the respondent-wife is

concerned.

Since the matter has been pending for a long time and evidence has been

recorded to some extent, we direct the learned Magistrate to dispose of the pending

4

proceedings within six months from the date of communication of this order.

The other Special Leave Petition, being No.7924 of 2008, be delinked from the

appeal arising out of SLP(C)No.7503 of 2008, being disposed of by this order, and be

listed separately for final disposal after the summer vacation.

The order of attachment of the salary of the appellant, which had been stayed

in these proceedings, shall continue till the final disposal of the matter by the learned

Magistrate. In the event, the appellant defaults in making the payment in terms of this

order, the Magistrate will be at liberty to re-impose the order of attachment.

...................J.
(ALTAMAS KABIR)

...................J.
(CYRIAC JOSEPH)

New Delhi,
April 28, 2009.


 


Attached File : 44 44 sc takeemiintocosideration.doc downloaded: 120 times

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     08 November 2010

ranjeet sigh ji , 3 dependent children are also important factor besides home loan and parents, only time will tell ki oont kis karwat sitting depending on facts of case an presentAtion by lawyers of both ides.


(Guest)

Dear Learned Members,

 

Now Situation is:

 

  1. She is living with her husband and children at their home which is in her husband’s name.
  2. No desertion, no cruelty by husband though she is cruel to her husband, husband is looking after her and taking care of all needs and maintaining her to the best of his capabilities.
  3. She is not listening to anyone either from her parent’s side or her husband’s side.
  4. Adamant to live separately without any cause, however constructive desertion is going on by her from last two months.

 

Query is:

 

In which section of CRPC or HMA her Advocate (Do not know the advocate but she is telling that she has consulted some advocate) is advising her that she is eligible for maintenance?

 

To avail maintenance what could be the possible move from her side?

 

What should husband do to save his marriage and avoid family breaking as it will be very hard for him socially?

 

May be she is some problem needs to be addressed by some Family Counselor or Doctor but refusing to consult any one.

 

Thanks & Regards,


(Guest)

Dear Learned Members,

 

Filing RCR at this stage is possible and beneficial or not ??

 

Any adverse outcome possible if husband files RCR ??

 

Filing RCR Means she has to open her mouth and say why she is doing all this and harassing her husband

 

Any advice please ??


(Guest)

One more thing they are living under same roof.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register