The court upheld the magisterial court order asking the man, who had also contested Lok Sabha election from Haridwar, to pay Rs 60,000 to the woman and their kid.
The court rejected the claim of the man that his yearly income was Rs 4-5 lakh and said his total monthly expenditure shown to be Rs 69,000, was inconsistent with his version of annual income.
The court noted that the man had himself admitted that he had a petrol pump, two houses and agriculture land in Haridwar and he had mentioned in his poll affidavit that he also owned four high-end cars. He was also maintaining two expensive mobile phones and used to visit 5-star hotels.
"Considering the facts, the trial court has rightly assessed the income of appellant to be Rs 4 to 5 lakh per month for deciding the interim compensation," Additional Sessions Judge Arvind Kumar said.
The judge also said "the trial court has committed no error in holding that respondent (woman) is entitled to compensation Rs 60,000 per month. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the order passed by trial court assuming income of appellant to be Rs 4 to 5 lakh per month and holding that respondent is entitled to Rs 60,000 per month."