Harpreet Sawhney v. Puneet Sharma

1. The present Matrimonial Appeal has been filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 assailing correctness of the order dated 12.07.2024 passed in HMA No.1931/2019 passed by the Ld. Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, West District, Tis Hazari, Delhi captioned Harpreet Sawhney vs Puneet Sharma, directing the Respondent to pay Rs.1,00,000/- per month for both his children from April, 2024.

2. On a perusal of the record, it appears that both the Appellant and the Respondent are working professionals. The Appellant is drawing a monthly salary of Rs.1,25,000/- out of which she is paying Rs.56,000/- towards EMI for the house (Flat No. 04124 ATS Greens Paradiso, Section CHI[4], Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh – 201310) purchased by the couple. Thus, she is left with a lump sum amount of Rs.70,000/- every month for the remaining expenses.

3. Both the children are studying in Shiv Nadar School, Noida. This Court has been apprised of the fact that apart from the school fee of the children, the money is being utilized for their shopping and extra-curricular activities.

4. On the other hand, the Respondent who has appeared in-person states that apart from his salary, which according to him is close to Rs.4,00,000/- per month, he is also getting a bonus on an average @ Rs.6,00,000/- per annum. Thus, his monthly income is estimated to be Rs.4,50,000/- (approx.). Out of this monthly income, Rs.1,64,856/- is required to be deducted towards compulsory deductions, including income tax, provident fund, professional tax, etc. He is left with Rs.2,80,000/- (approx.) every month.

5. The learned counsel representing the Appellant has drawn the attention of the Court to the Income Tax Return (ITR) filed by the Respondent for the F.Y. 2022-23 and 2023-24, reflecting his income as Rs.60,36,960/- and Rs.70,67,370/- per annum respectively. However, the Respondent submits that the spike in the income during the above-mentioned ITR period was due to the sale of shares carried out by him.

6. Keeping in view the overall facts of the present Appeal, this Court is of the considered view that the amount awarded by the Family Court is not sufficient, particularly when the children are also entitled to the same facilities as enjoyed by their parents. Hence, the Respondent is directed to pay Rs.1,25,000/- per month as maintenance for both the children from the month of April, 2024.

7. Furthermore, the Respondent has also undertaken to execute necessary documents for transfer of the ownership of car, namely, Mahindra XUV 500 bearing registration No. UP16BA2073 in favour of the Petitioner.

8. Since, the Respondent failed to attend the hearing, Notice for initiation of contempt was issued, however, he has entered appearance and apologized for his conduct.

9. Consequently, CONT.CAS(C) 634/2025 is closed.

10. The present Appeal along with the pending application, is disposed of with the aforegoing directions. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. AUGUST 14, 2025/sg/sh