Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

High Court Modifies Maintenance Order, Ensures Fair Treatment – Justice Vikas Bahl Advocates Equitable Maintenance in Senior Citizen Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a notable decision, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikas Bahl, modified an existing maintenance order under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Court’s intervention ensured fair treatment in a case where the original maintenance amount had been discriminatorily enhanced against one of two brothers.

Justice Bahl, in his ruling, addressed the imbalance created by an Appellate Tribunal’s earlier decision. The Tribunal had increased the petitioner’s maintenance payment from Rs.700/- to Rs.3000/- per month, while his brother’s contribution remained unchanged. This modification was challenged by the petitioner on grounds of discrimination.

In a statement that underlines the Court’s stance on equitable treatment, Justice Bahl observed, “It is apparently discriminatory that one of the brothers has been required to pay maintenance of Rs.700/- p.m. whereas the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs.3000/- p.m.”

Following this observation, the High Court directed the petitioner to deposit the entire arrears of maintenance calculated at the rate of Rs.1000/- per month from November 2016. Additionally, the petitioner was ordered to pay litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.

The final settlement reached in the Court led to the petitioner agreeing to pay Rs.1000/- per month regularly as maintenance to the senior citizen, respondent No.3. The Court modified the impugned order accordingly and emphasized the importance of regular payments by setting a monthly deadline.

 Date of Decision: 05.01.2024

Jaspal Singh VS District Magistrate, Patiala and others   

 

Latest Legal News