CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness

Deprivation of Property Rights Constitutes Economic Abuse; Maintenance Right Intact Despite Ownership Claims Through Will: Bombay HC in Domestic Violence Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision, the Bombay High Court upheld the entitlement of a daughter-in-law to Rs.60,000 monthly maintenance in a domestic violence case, emphasizing the recognition of economic abuse and property rights under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

The case revolved around the petitioner, a mother-in-law, challenging the interim maintenance awarded to her daughter-in-law, citing the non-existence of a domestic relationship and ownership of properties via a will. Key issues included assessing the validity of economic abuse claims, property rights, and the determination of the maintenance amount.

Economic Abuse and Property Rights: Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh observed, "The pleadings demonstrate the specific case of not only verbal and emotional abuse but also economic abuse by way of depriving the Respondent No 2 of the properties and business of her late husband..." The court examined the economic abuse allegations and the dispute over property ownership through the will.

Quantum of Interim Maintenance: The judgment referenced "Rajnesh vs. Neha," underlining the principle that maintenance must reflect the standard of living in the matrimonial home. The court scrutinized financial disclosures, noting inconsistencies in the petitioner’s income declarations.

Income Suppression in Maintenance Calculation: The court pointed out, "It is therefore clear that the Petitioner has suppressed the income earned from the said businesses from the Court." The income suppression by the petitioner was a pivotal factor in determining the maintenance amount.

Decision: The High Court dismissed the petition, affirming the monthly maintenance of Rs.60,000. An extension of ad-interim relief was granted for four weeks following the judgment's uploading, in consideration of the existing support since March 2023.

Date of Decision : 21  March 2024.

Rekha Anandrao Ranbhare vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

 

Latest Legal News