SARFAESI Act | Sale Certificate Cannot Be Issued In Favour Of A Third-Party Nominee Who Was Not The Auction Bidder: Supreme Court SARFAESI Act | Auction Sale Conducted In Violation Of Mandatory Rules And Subsisting Restraint Order Is Vitiated In Law: Supreme Court Recovery Of Alleged Overpayment From A Separate, Unrelated Contract Without Notice Violates Principles Of Natural Justice: Supreme Court IBC | Adjudicating Authority Has Power To Recall CIRP Admission Order If It Was Obtained Through Fraud Or Collusion: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Presumption Of Service Is Attracted Once Notice Is Dispatched To Correct Address Of Drawer: Supreme Court Operation Of Hookah Bars In Restaurants Constitutes Violation Of Rule 4(3) Of COTPA Rules: Allahabad High Court High Court Cannot Recall Order Passed On Merits Even If Passed Ex-Parte: Bombay High Court Administrative Authorities Cannot Pass Orders Having Civil Consequences Without Meaningful Consideration Of The Affected Employee’s Response: Allahabad High Court Discharge Application Cannot Be Converted Into A 'Mini-Trial' To Assess Evidentiary Sufficiency: Andhra Pradesh High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Allegations Are Falsified By Documents Annexed To Plaint Or Based On Non-Existent Law: Bombay High Court Police Cannot Interfere In Pending Civil Disputes Or Act As Arbitrators In Private Property Conflicts: Andhra Pradesh High Court Contract For Personal Services Between Doctor And Hospital Is Determinable And Not Specifically Enforceable: Calcutta High Court Allegations Of Sexual Offences Cannot Be Quashed Based On Contradictory Evidence Requiring Mini-Trial: Delhi High Court PMLA Adjudication | Failure To Expressly Discuss Every Submission In Written Synopsis Does Not Vitiate Order Under Principles Of Natural Justice: Karnataka High Court Prolonged Separation Of Sixteen Years Constitutes Cruelty Under Special Marriage Act: Kerala High Court Grants Divorce Order XII Rule 6 CPC | Decree Of Possession Can Be Granted On Admissions Even If Relationship Of Landlord-Tenant Is Disputed: Delhi High Court Non-Framing Of Issues Under Order XIV CPC Does Not Vitiate Trial Unless Prejudice Is Proved: Madras High Court Order 47 Rule 1 CPC | Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Cure Failure To Produce Evidence That Was Within Knowledge Of Applicant: Madhya Pradesh High Court Codicil To A Will Must Be Proved Like A Will; Propounder Must Remove All Suspicious Circumstances: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Lodging Of Section 498-A IPC Case Not Cruelty: Telangana High Court Sets Aside Divorce Decree Order XVII Rule 3 CPC | Power To Dismiss Suit For Default Of Evidence Is Drastic And Must Be Exercised Sparingly: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Directed to wife to pay Maintenance – Bombay HC

07 May 2024 8:19 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