Interim Order 1

Order Details: Interim Maintenance Order
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
22nd COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
C.C. NO.67/DV/2018
Mr. Poonam Sachin Saini ... Applicant
V/s
Mr. Jagatnarayan Saini & others ... Respondents
ORDER BELOW INTERIM MAINTENANCE APPLICATION EXH18
FILED BY APPLICANT ON 31.12.2021
This is an application filed by applicant against the
respondents for interim maintenance. Her contention is that her
husband is the son of respondent Nos. 1 & 2. She married with their
son Sachin Saini on 18.05.2013 and from the wedlock she gave birth to
a son namely Gauransh on 04.10.2014. Unfortunately, on 26.01.2016
her husband passed away. After passing of her husband the
respondents, her inlaws had not taken care of her and her child. She is
in financial crunch and in need of money, therefore prayed for
Rs.25,000/ per month from respondents as a way of interim
maintenance.
The respondents appeared and filed detail reply at Exh7.
Respondent No.1 contended that he is a retired man and is living his
livelihood on meager pension. It is contended that applicant has
willfully left the matrimonial house, after death of her husband. They
have never obstructed her from returning home back. Even respondent
No.1 has taken loan from Financial Institution to support husband of
applicant when he was alive and he is still paying installments.
Respondent No.5 is married and living separately and she has nothing
...2/
-- 1 of 3 --
… 2 …
to do with the shared household affairs. Even the respondent No. 3 has
his own family and he is engaged in it. The respondent No.1 has given
all his pensionery benefits to the husband of applicant to support his
new venture. None of the respondents have objected applicant from
staying at matrimonial house at any point of time. The applicant is
educated and was employed prior to marriage and she is able lady to
maintain herself and her son.
Heard. Perused record.
The application is restricted to the claim of maintenance.
The applicant is claiming maintenance from her inlaws. The
applicantion as well as the petition filed on record is totally silent in
respect to the fact that they had ancestral property and after death of
her husband the respondents are deducing income from it, so as to
enable her to claim her maintenance from the inlaws i.e. respondents.
The respondent No.1 is aged old main living his livelihood on merge
pension, is an admitted fact. Further, in the Assets & Liabilities the
applicant has admitted that she is earning Rs.12,353/ per month. Even
on the death of her husband all life insurance claim in respect to the life
insurance was received by her. There is no law to compel inlaws to
maintain daughterinlaw, unless there is evidence along with pleading
in respect to joint family property held by all of them together and out
of it, they are receiving regular income.
Even the applicant relied upon Criminal Revision
Application No. 152/2019 of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court
decided on 02.11.2020 Smt. Devmani Thakkar V/s. State of
Maharashtra;2) Hon'ble Supreme Court's Criminal Appeal
No.617/2019 Ajay Kumar V/s. Lata & others decided on 8.4.2019.
...3/
-- 2 of 3 --
… 3 ... C.C. No. 67/DV/2018
Order below Exh.18, contd.
On going through both the authorities, the facts are totally different. In
the said cases they had joint family business and the parties have share
in the business and while granting maintenance to the wife i.e.
applicant it has been held that out of joint business the applicant is
entitled to seek separate maintenance from the inlaws, but in the case
in hand there is no such pleading nor anything on record which enable
applicant to lay claim for separate maintenance from her inlaws.
Application is devoid on merits and deserves rejection. Hence, the
following order:
ORDER
Application stands rejected.
Date : 09.03.2023
Sd/
(J. W. Gaikwad)
Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai
csj
-- 3 of 3 --