SH. RAHUL KHANDOOJA vs KIRAN KHANDOOJA

Judgment text excerpt

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 25.04.2025 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 154/2025 SH. RAHUL KHANDOOJA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Shubham Pandey, Mr. Kailash Chand Samaniya and Mr. Chirag Chaturvedi, Advs. versus KIRAN KHANDOOJA .....Respondent Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR RENU BHATNAGAR, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 24222/2025 (Exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL. 24224/2025 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of four days in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The application stands disposed of. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 154/2025 AND CM APPL. 24223/2025 4. The instant appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed by the appellant, challenging the Order dated 12.02.2025 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court-01, North East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Family Court’) in HMA No. 645/2023 titled Kiran Khandooja v. Rahul Khandooja, disposing of the application filed by the respondent-wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter Signature Not Verified Signed By:VIJAYA MAT.APP.(F.C.) 154/2025 Page 1 of 9 LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:05.05.2025 16:15:47 referred to as ‘HMA Act’) in the following terms: “27. In terms of the ‘Annurita Vohra vs. Sandecp Vohra’, reported as, ‘2004 (3) AD252, the income of the respondent is to be divided into three units. The respondent would be entitled to two units for himself and petitioner would be entitled to 1 unit. The share of the petitioner would come to Rs. 15,000/- per month. Petitioner is already earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. In order to give same status, petitioner is granted a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application und