Benefit Of Acquittal Can Be Extended To Non-Appealing Co-Accused If Prosecution Case Is Found To Be Fundamentally Unreliable: Madras High Court Hindu Marriage Act | Petition For Restitution Of Conjugal Rights Serves As A Valid Defence Against Allegations Of Desertion: Kerala High Court Employee Has No Vested Right To Seek Or Retain Additional Charge; Writ Petition Not Maintainable To Challenge Its Withdrawal: Madhya Pradesh High Court Insurance Act | Insurer Cannot Waive Statutory Deadline For Premium Payment Under Bank Guarantee; No Estoppel Against Statute: NCDRC Absence Of Crime Number In Inquest Report & Discrepancy In Sec 157 CrPC Special Report Renders FIR Doubtful: Allahabad High Court MTP Act  | Termination Of Pregnancy Beyond 24 Weeks Permissible If It Involves Risk To Life Or Grave Injury To Mental Health Of The Victim: Gujarat High Court Section 174A IPC | FIR Cannot Be Quashed If Process Server Reports Indicate Failure To Serve At Ordinary Residence: Delhi High Court Issues Guidelines Insolvency Petition | Transferees Of Debtor Cannot Substitute Debtor To Rebut Allegation Of Intent To Defeat Creditors Under Section 6(b) Provincial Insolvency Act: High Court Medical Negligence | Doctor Cannot Be Held Liable For Choosing One Reasonable Course Of Treatment Over Another: Bombay High Court Cruelty | Non-Registration Of FIR Cannot Be Ground To Discredit Testimony Of Wife Seeking Divorce: Jharkhand High Court No Deception At Inception: Calcutta High Court Refuses To Revive Cheating Charges Against Borrower After One-Time Settlement Consumer Protection Act | Doctrine Of 'Caveat Emptor' Subservient To 'Caveat Venditor'; Auctioneer Liable For Sale Of Encumbered Vehicle: State Commission Section 127 CrPC | Past Compromise Not An Eternal Estoppel To Bar Wife From Seeking Enhancement In Maintenance: Orissa High Court States Can Prescribe Higher Qualifications Than UGC Norms, Additional Tests Promote Meritocracy: Punjab & Haryana High Court Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Cancel Registered Sale Deed Or Adjudicate Title Disputes: Telangana High Court Principal Employer Cannot Abdicate Statutory Liability For Overtime Wages Of Contract Labour Despite Contractual Indemnity Clauses: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Preliminary Inquiry Not Mandatory For Invoking SC/ST Act Provisions If Allegations Disclose Cognizable Offence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked For Re-valuation Of Structures Once Compensation Dispute Is Adjudicated Under Section 64 RFCTLARR Act: Telangana High Court Revenue Village Naming | Government Must Ensure Names Do Not Reflect Any Person, Caste, Or Religion Under Policy Guidelines: Rajasthan High Court Section 138 NI Act | Complainant Must Prove Proprietorship Of Firm To Establish Status As 'Payee' Or 'Holder In Due Course': Himachal Pradesh High Court

Directed to wife to pay Maintenance – Bombay HC

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


The Bombay High Court has declared that the application of Section 25 of the Act of 1955 to a divorce order granted to a husband and wife cannot be limited by doing so.

"Section 25 needs to be looked at as a provision for destitute wife/husband. The clauses would have to be construed broadly so as to rescue the remedial entailments," the Justice Bharati Dangre panel ruled.

According to Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, the wife petitioned for the dissolution of the marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

The petition was granted, and the couples' marriage was thereafter dissolved. The husband (respondent) filed a petition, asking for the wife to pay him Rs. 15,000 per month in permanent alimony.

A warrant for collection of arrears may be issued against the wife, and the amounts owing and payable may be withheld from her wages and deposited with the court. This was the learned judge's instruction.

The order made by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded, has angered the wife.

After examining Sections 24 and 25 of the Act of 1955, the High Court determined that both sections are enabling provisions and grant the indigent spouse the right to pursue maintenance in the form of permanent alimony and maintenance or pendente lite.

According to the bench, "The provision of maintenance or permanent alimony being a beneficial provision for the indigent spouse, the said section can be invoked by either of the spouses, where a decree of any kind governed by Sections 9 to 13 has been passed and marriage tie is broken, disrupted, or adversely affected by such court decree. The application of Section 25 of the Act of 1955 to a divorce decree granted to a husband and wife cannot be excluded in order to limit its reach.

D.D-26TH FEBRUARY, 2022.

Given the foregoing, the petition was denied by the High Court.

Bhagyashri Vs Jagdish

Latest Legal News