Ashan Kumar Dhunna v. Meenu

O R D E R %

25.10.2016

CM No.39711/2016

Allowed subject to all just exceptions. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 155/2016 & CM No.39710/2016

¶1Learned counsel for the appellant states that the grievance of the appellant is that apart from ₹40,000/- per month awarded as maintenance to the wife vide order dated January 30, 2016 under Section 125 Cr.P.C., vide impugned order dated May 18, 2016 additional monthly maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in same amount has been passed.

¶2If this is the only grievance which is urged at the hearing today, we need to only state that the impugned order does not direct ₹40,000/- per month to be paid in addition to the same amount which has to be paid by the appellant to his wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The impugned order simply MAT.APP.(F.C.) 155/2016

Page1 of 2 disposes of the application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 fixing monthly maintenance in sum of ₹40,000/-.

¶3The liability of the appellant is to pay ₹40,000/- per month to his wife.

¶4As regards litigation expenses in sum of ₹11,000/- we find no infirmity therein for the reason that the appellant has sought annulment of the marriage by seeking a decree of divorce and wife need money to defend the same.

¶5The appeal is dismissed, clarifying as above.

¶6No costs. CM No.39709/2016

Dismissed as infructuous.

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

PRATIBHA RANI, J. OCTOBER 25, 2016 'st'

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 155/2016

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 155/2016 ASHAN KUMAR DHUNNA ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr.Nitesh Rana and Mr.Manish Jain, Advocates. versus MEENU ..... Respondent Represented by: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI