HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 32 of 2026 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE ATUL SREEDHARAN, J. HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Phool Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 08.10.2025 passed by the learned court below whereby an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent wife has been allowed and the learned court below has awarded monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- in favour of the respondent wife. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amount is in excess and the total amount would now be Rs.8,000/- as she is already receiving Rs.3,000/- from the appellant herein in compliance of the order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. He has also submitted that the appellant is suffering from tuberculosis (TB) for which he has burden towards his treatment. He has submitted that on account of ailment, the appellant is unable to work regularly as a labourer. Learned counsel for the appellant has also stated that appellant is 10th standard passed and therefore the amount is liable to be reduced. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand has submitted that there is no requirement for interference in the impugned order as the same is Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Mithilesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : Phool Singh Yadav, Vaibhav Yadav Anurag .....Appellant(s) Smt. Soni .....Respondent(s) well reasoned and has taken into account the totality of the circumstances prevailing against the respondent wife. He has further stated that merely because the appellant is only 10th standard passed does not obviate the responsibility of maintaining the respondent as she is his legally wedded wife. He has further stated that the respondent is compelled to live separately from her husband on account of matrimonial cruelty meted out to the respondent. He has further submitted that it is undisputed that the learned court below under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has already awarded Rs.3,000/- as maintenance. He has further stated that the said amount would stand amalgamated with the amount of Rs.5,000/- per month given in the impugned order. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 6. Undisputedly, in this case, the appellant is husband of the respondent. As regards the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is suffering from tuberculosis (TB) on account of which he is unable to perform his regular work and therefore his earnings are decreased, is rejected as no document pertaining to the illness was ever placed before the learned trial court giving it an opportunity to consider the same and pass appropriate order. Besides that, it is a well known fact that the disease of tuberculosis (TB) can be treated for free in Government Hospitals. 7. Be that as it may, looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount given to the respondent wife seems reasonable and the fear of the appellant that he would have to pay total amount of Rs.8,000/- stands operated by the fact that the learned trial court itself has stated that the amount of Rs.5,000/- would stand amalgamated with other maintenance amount passed by Court of competent jurisdiction. 8. Under the circumstances, the appeal stands dismissed. FAPLD No. 32 of 2026 2 May 12, 2026 R.S. Tiwari FAPLD No. 32 of 2026 3 (Vivek Saran,J.) (Atul Sreedharan,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad