NON-REPORTABLE        

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.1789-1790 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) NOS. 24589-24590 of 2007)

Anu Kaul                                                       ……..  Appellant

Versus

Rajeev Kaul ……..Respondent

O R D E R

Leave granted.

2) In the appeal filed by the respondent-husband before the High Court

of Punjab and Haryana, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree

passed  by  Addl.  District  Judge  (Ad-hoc),  Fast  Track  Court  No.3,

Faridabad,  dated  04.06.2005,  the  appellant  herein  had  filed  an

application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for the

grant of interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand

only) and the litigation expense of Rs. 22,000/- (Rupees Twenty Two

Thousand only).  The application is partly allowed by the Court by its

1

order  dated  23.08.2006,  by  granting  an  amount  of  Rs.10,000/-

towards  litigation  expense  and  a  sum  of   Rs.2,000/-  for  the

maintenance of the minor child living with her.  The Review Petition

is  also  dismissed  by  the  Court  vide  its  order  dated  21.03.2007,

leaving  it  open  to  the  appellant/applicant  to  claim  interim

maintenance  before  an  appropriate  forum  in  the  capacity  as  a

Guardian of the child.

3) Challenging both the orders, the appellant-wife is before us in these

appeals.

4) Though notice of special leave petition is served on the respondent-

husband,  for  the  reason  best  known  to  him,  has  not  entered

appearance either in person or through his counsel.

5) Marriage between the parties and birth of the female child Karmistha

Kaul   is  not  in  dispute.   The  assertion  of  the  appellant  in  the

application filed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955  that

the respondent is working as a Senior Head of Mukund Steel Ltd.,

having its head office at Mumbai and drawing a salary of Rs.40,000/-

per  month  and  is  entitled  to  claim perks  for  the  education  of  his

children  was  not  denied  by  the  respondent  by  filing  his  counter

affidavit or reply statement.

2

6) In the application filed, the appellant admits that she is employed and

drawing a salary of Rs.9,000/- per month.  However, she asserts, she

has to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- by way of rent to the tenanted

premises which she is presently occupying in view of the lis between

the parties.  She has also stated, that, Kumari Karmisatha Kaul is now

grown up and she is studying in Senior School and due to insufficient

funds, her education is being hampered.

7) A  sermon  on  moral  responsibility  and  ethics,  in  our  opinion  for

disposing of this appeal may not be necessary, since the respondent

has not disputed the assertion of the appellant.  However, since the

appellant  is  employed  and  is  drawing  a  salary  of  Rs.9,000/-  per

month, we do not intend to enhance the interim maintenance awarded

to her by the High Court during the pendency of the appeal filed by

the husband.  However, taking into consideration the child being the

daughter of highly placed officer, the exorbitant fee structure in good

Schools  and  the  cost  of  living,  we  deem  it  proper  to  direct  the

respondent  to  pay a  sum of  Rs.5,000/-  per  month  to  the  applicant

commencing from 1st of April, 2009 for the maintenance of the minor

child during the pendency of the appeals before the High Court.

8) The appeals are disposed of accordingly.

3

                                                                                     …………………………………J.                                                                                        [ TARUN CHATTERJEE ]

                                                                                     …………………………………J.                                                                                        [ H.L. DATTU ] New Delhi, March 23, 2009.

4