Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

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