Delhi High Court : Maintainance u/s 24 HMA : Sujata Aggarwal Vs. Ravi Shanker

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUBJECT : HINDU MARRIAGE ACT
Date of Reserve: September 08, 2008
Date of Order : October 02, 2008
CRP 138/2008
Sujata Aggarwal ...Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manu Nayar with
Mr. Hameed S. Shaikh, Advs.
Versus
Ravi Shankar Agarwal ...Respondent
Through: Mr. Sunil Mittal and
Mr. V.S. Pandey, Adv.
JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
ORDER
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 24th March, 2007 whereby
the learned ADJ dismissed an Execution application filed by the petitioner.
2. The petitioner had filed an execution of the following order: ?The
petitioner in his reply has stated that the respondent has got a bank account
where there is balance of around Rs.3 lakhs and she is getting income of
around Rs.13000/- p.m. by way of dividend etc. However, respondent/wife
has stated that said deposits are without her knowledge and instructions. She
also stated that she is not aware of the details of the said deposits or the
shares. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner will have no
objection if the amount lying the bank account are utilized by the respondent
towards her maintenance without prejudice to the rights of the parties under
Section 24 of HMA. He also says that his client would help the respondent
to locating the sources of dividend/interest warrants received in her bank
account though his stand is that those share/deposits etc. are in possession of
the respondent. He also states that the petitioner will have no objection if the
respondent utilizes the said dividend which comes to her account or may be
coming to her account, without prejudice to the rights of the parties.
Respondent says that cheques towards dividend etc. are in fact coming at the
address of the petitioner. If that is so, the petitioner is directed to send those
dividends/ communications to the respondent and also to inform the
companies about the current/present address of the respondent. Respondent
at her own may also seek information about the source of
investment/deposits in her bank account in case she may like to submit
further in this regard she will be entitled to do so in the course of the
proceedings.?
3. This order was passed by learned ADJ on 11th August, 2000, before the
disposal of application under Section 24 of HMA. After passing of this
order, the application under Section 24 of HMA was considered on merits
and the maintenance was fixed taking into account the income and liability
of the husband. The petitioner's contention is that husband had taken a stand
that wife was receiving an income of Rs.13,000/- per month by way of
dividends and this stand of the husband had affected the mindset of the Trial
Court while fixing maintenance and Trial Court had taken into account this
income of the wife as alleged by the husband. Since this income was alleged
by the husband by way of dividend, the husband was liable to pay this
amount to the wife or was liable to handover the shares/deposits yielding
this income.
4. It is normal for husband and wife to make allegations and counter
allegations in respect of each others' income. These allegations and counter
allegations are considered by the Court while disposing of the application
under Section 24 of HM Act. The allegations and counter allegations made
by the husband and wife cannot be subject matter of the execution, even if
they are mentioned in an order of the Court.
5. I find no infirmity in the order of the Trial Court. The petition is hereby
dismissed.
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.