ITEM NO.62 Court No.6 SECTION XIIA
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).23057/2007
(From the judgement and order dated 06/10/2007 in CMP No. 1606/2006 & CMA No. 2200/2004 of The HIGH COURT OF A.P AT HYDERABAD)
KOTA PRATAP BABU Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
VANKAYALAPATI RAMALAKSHMI & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for permission to place addl. documents on record and prayer for interim relief ))
Date: 24/04/2009 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
For Petitioner(s) Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad,Adv.
Mr. B. Suyodhan,Adv.
Mr. Amar pal,Adv.
Mr. Bharat J. Joshi,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. A.V. Rao,Adv.
Mr. Prabhakar Parnam,Adv.
Mr. Venkateswara Rao Anumolu,Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
Leave granted. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(Ganga Thakur) ( Juginder Kaur )
P.S. to Registrar Court Master
Signed order is placed on the file.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2809 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.23057/07)
Versus
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
By the impugned order, the Division Bench of the High Court has
passed an interim order directing the appellant – husband to pay an amount
of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent – wife from the date of the petition, namely, 8th
September, 2006, till October, 2007, and, thereafter, to continue to pay the
same every month.
On behalf of the appellant, it is submitted that at the relevant time
when the order was passed, the appellant had produced a Certificate from the
Institution in which he was employed, to indicate that he was receiving a total
salary of Rs. 5,440/- and in- spite of the same, the impugned order was passed
directing him to pay Rs.5,000/- by way of maintenance to the respondent.
During the hearing of the appeal, the appellant has produced a further
Certificate showing the present salary being drawn by him from Vigyan
Degree College, in which he was working as a Lecturer in the
English department. From the Certificate which has been issued on 9th April,
2009, it appears that the appellant is being paid a salary of Rs. 9910/- per
month.
It has also been pointed out by the respondent that the appellant
owns other properties and the income therefrom was not taken into
consideration. On the other hand, on behalf of the appellant it is submitted
that the respondent also runs a school and the income therefrom has also not
been taken into consideration while granting maintenance to the appellant.
Having regard to the above, we set aside the order passed by the
High Court and direct the High Court to consider the matter afresh in the
light of the fresh materials which have been produced and which may be
produced on behalf of the respondent.
In the meantime, as an interim measure, the appellant will pay to the
respondent-wife maintenance at the reduced rate of Rs.2500/- per month from
the month of May, 2009.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
( B. SUDERSHAN REDDY ) New Delhi, April 24, 2009.