2025:HHC:37276 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 451 of 2025 with CMPMO No. 65 of 2025 Decided on: 06.11.2025 CMPMO No. 451 of 2025 Budh Ram … Petitioner Versus Smt.Hima Devi and another … Respondents CMPMO No. 65 of 2025 Snt. Hima Devi and another … Petitioners Versus Sh. Budh Ram … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ___________________________________________________________________ CMPMO No. 451 of 2025 For the petitioner : Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vijay Panchta, Advocate as Legal Aid Counsel. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CMPMO No. 65 of 2025 For the petitioners : Ms. Vandana Kumari, Advocate as Legal Aid Counsel. For the respondent : Mr. G.R.Palsra, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of these two petitions, the petitioner(s) herein have challenged the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kullu, in Cr. Appeal No. 22 of 2024, titled as Budh Ram vs. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:37276 Smt. Hima Devi and another and Cr. Appeal No. 78 of 2024, titled as Smt. Hima Devi and another vs. Sh. Budh Ram, decided on 22.07.2024, filed under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, in terms whereof, learned Appellate Court whereas has dismissed the appeal filed by the husband and has allowed the appeal filed by the wife and daughter, enhancing the maintenance payable to them from Rs.1500 per month to Rs. 3000 per month to the wife and from Rs.3500 per month to Rs.7000/- per month to the daughter. One petition has been filed by the husband seeking setting aside of the order passed by the learned Appellate Court, in terms whereof, the maintenance amount has been enhanced and the other petition has been filed by the wife and daughter for enhancement of the maintenance amount as awarded by the learned Appellate Court. 2. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties including learned Legal Aid Counsel, this Court is of the considered view that in the facts of the case, the judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court is a well reasoned judgment, in which, reasons stand spelled out as to why the amount of maintenance awarded to the parties calls for no interference, save and except the maintenance amount that has been awarded in favour of the wife which requires some enhancement. The husband is duty bound to maintain his wife and daughter. Maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per 3 2025:HHC:37276 month in favour of the wife, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be a reasonable maintenance, as this Court can take judicial notice of the fact that a person cannot survive upon maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month, more so, in view of the fact that it could not be demonstrated during the course of hearing of this petition that the wife was having any other source of income. 3. Therefore, both these petitions are disposed of by modifying order passed by learned Appellate Court to the effect that this Court has maintained the award of maintenance in favour of the daughter but as far as the wife is concerned, the same stands enhanced to Rs.5000/- per month from Rs.3000/- per month but prospectively, i.e. w.e.f. the month of December, 2025. 4 The Court places its appreciation on record to the assistance rendered by learned legal Aid Counsel in disposal of these cases and it is directed that full fee be paid to them. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge Noevember 06, 2025 (narender)