Interim Maintenance Granted Under Section 24 HMA Continues During Pendency Of Appeal, Proceeding Ends Only After Exhausting Remedies: Delhi High Court

"The proceeding does not attain finality merely because the Trial Court has delivered its judgment; it remains alive and pending until all appellate remedies are exhausted. The word 'proceeding' in Section 24 of the HMA must therefore be read to include the appellate stage." Delhi High Court, in a significant ruling dated July 14, 2026, has held that interim maintenance awarded under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) during the trial stage must continue during the pendency of an appeal.

A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Renu Bhatnagar observed that an appeal is not a fresh proceeding but a continuation of the original matrimonial suit, and therefore, the statutory protection for a spouse without independent income remains operative until the matter reaches finality.

The parties were married in 2012 and have been living separately since 2015. The Respondent, an officer in the Indian Army, instituted a divorce petition on grounds of cruelty and desertion, during which the Family Court awarded the Appellant-wife interim maintenance at 30% of the husband's gross salary. Following the grant of a divorce decree in July 2025, the wife challenged the dissolution of marriage before the High Court and sought the continuation of the maintenance order during the pendency of the appeal.

The primary question before the court was whether an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act constitutes a "proceeding" within the meaning of Section 24 of the HMA. The court was also called upon to determine if the maintenance awarded pendente lite during the trial automatically ceases upon the passing of a decree if an appeal against the said decree is preferred and pending.

Appeal Is A Continuation Of The Original Proceeding

The court began by emphasizing the settled procedural principle that an appeal is not an independent or fresh proceeding. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Jagdish Singh v. Madhuri Devi (2008), the Bench noted that the legal fiction of "continuation of suit" applies to appeals. Consequently, the expression "any proceedings under this Act" mentioned in Section 24 of the HMA must necessarily encompass the appellate stage, as the subject matter and the parties remain the same.

Scope Of "Proceeding" Under Section 24 HMA

The Bench observed that the substantive right to appeal arises from the HMA itself, even if the procedural framework is governed by the CPC or the Family Courts Act. Referring to the Gujarat High Court’s ruling in Hansaben v. Ashwinkumar Kacharabhai Patel (2014), the Court clarified that the Appellate Court possesses the jurisdiction to grant or continue interim maintenance. This ensures that the spouse is not left without financial support while the higher court adjudicates the legality of the lower court’s decree.

Court Distinguishes Between Section 24 And Section 25 Of HMA

The Respondent had placed heavy reliance on Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2025) to argue that Section 24 ceases to operate once a decree is passed, and the wife should instead move an application for permanent alimony under Section 25. However, the High Court distinguished the precedent, noting that Section 25 applies to final adjudications. It held that so long as the decree is challenged and the appeal is pending, the litigation has not attained finality, keeping the door open for Section 24 reliefs.

"The existence of a Section 25 remedy, which is yet to be adjudicated and may take considerable time, does not extinguish the entitlement of the Appellant under Section 24 of the HMA during the appellate proceedings."

Capability To Earn Is Not Equivalent To Actual Earning

Addressing the husband’s contention that the wife is an MBA graduate capable of earning, the Bench reiterated the principle laid down in Shallja v. Khobanna (2018). The Court held that a mere qualification or "capability to earn" cannot be a ground to deny maintenance to a spouse who is not actually earning. It noted that the Family Court had already examined the wife's financial status and ITRs, and the husband could not re-agitate the issue of her employability at the appellate stage.

Interim Maintenance Designed To Prevent Financial Hardship

The Court highlighted that the very "mischief" Section 24 seeks to prevent is the financial strangulation of a spouse during the course of litigation. By allowing the maintenance to continue, the Court ensured that the Appellant could effectively contest the appeal without being burdened by day-to-day survival needs. The Bench clarified that family arrangements, such as the wife transferring received funds to her father or sister for household expenses, do not indicate a lack of financial need.

"To hold otherwise would leave the Appellant without any financial support during the appeal, which is precisely the mischief that Section 24 seeks to prevent."

Final Directions Of The Court

The High Court allowed the application and directed the Respondent’s employer to continue deducting 30% of his current gross salary (after statutory deductions) and remit it directly to the Appellant. This order is to remain in effect from the date of the filing of the appeal (August 25, 2025) until the final disposal of the matrimonial appeal. The Court also clarified that the wife's pending application for permanent alimony under Section 25 before the Family Court remains unaffected and can be pursued independently.

The ruling reinforces the protective nature of matrimonial laws in India, ensuring that the right to maintenance is not extinguished by the mere passing of a trial court decree when the litigation is still being contested in higher forums. By defining "proceedings" to include the appellate stage, the Delhi High Court has bridged a potential gap that could have left dependent spouses vulnerable during the lengthy duration of appellate litigation.

Date of Decision: July 14, 2026