Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Penalty For Monthly MGQ Shortfall If Annual Target Met': Supreme Court Upholds Quashing Of Excise Department Demands For Liquor Licensees 'Murder Went Unavenged, But Courts Cannot Convict On Mere Assumptions': Supreme Court Acquits Accused In 1988 Murder Case, Quashes High Court's Remit Order 'NCSC Cannot Pass Mandatory Adjudicatory Orders Directing Payment Of Arrears': Supreme Court Clarifies Commission's Powers Under Article 338 "'Cannot Present Fait Accompli': Supreme Court Upholds Denial Of NOC To Airman For Skipping Prior Permission To Apply For Civil Post" Supreme Court Upholds 2017 Notification For Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances, Quashes 2021 Office Memorandum As Impermissible Executive Overreach Workman Fails To Prove 240 Days Continuous Work; Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Denial Of Reinstatement For "Abandonment Of Service" Party Cannot Take Contradictory Stands In Same Case, Admissions In Pleadings Bind Them Under Order XII Rule 6 CPC: Telangana High Court Delayed Recovery Of Weapon From Open Space Casts Serious Doubt On Prosecution Story: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Convicts Procedural Irregularities By Public Servants Serve As Circumstantial Evidence Of Conspiracy In Corruption Cases: Kerala High Court Blaming Previous Counsel For Omission Does Not Satisfy 'Due Diligence' Test To Amend Plaint After Trial Commences: Punjab & Haryana High Court Muslim Man's Second Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Void Despite Personal Law Permitting Bigamy: Karnataka High Court Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court Title And Ownership Irrelevant In Suit Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act; Plaint Liable To Be Rejected If Filed Beyond Six Months: Delhi High Court Receipt Of Pension By Widow Can Be Considered To Determine 'Just Compensation' But Not To Deprive Claimants Of Award: Calcutta High Court FSL Report Lacking Scientific Criteria And Data Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Allahabad High Court Issues Directives For Testing Viscera Standard Of Proof In Railway Accident Claims Is Preponderance Of Probabilities, Not Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Gujarat High Court No Second Statutory Appeal Lies Against Conviction By Appellate Court Reversing Acquittal; Revision Is Sole Remedy: Supreme Court Wives' Property Is Their Own, Not Husband's: Supreme Court REJECTS High Court's Succession Formula; Restores Clarity For Christian Inheritance

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