Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Maintenance Cannot Be Reclaimed Retroactively in Domestic Violence Cases: Supreme Court

01 October 2024 6:48 PM

By: sayum


An order for revocation can only apply prospectively, not to periods before the order. Supreme Court of India in S Vijikumari v. Mouneshwarachari C, ruled that maintenance already paid under a domestic violence order cannot be reclaimed retrospectively. The Court, presided by Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N.K. Singh, set aside the Karnataka High Court's decision to remand the matter to the Magistrate, holding that any modification under Section 25 of the Domestic Violence Act can only apply prospectively, following a change in circumstances after the original order.

The appellant, S Vijikumari, was awarded maintenance of ₹12,000 per month in 2015 under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The respondent, her husband Mouneshwarachari, filed an application under Section 25 of the Act, claiming that the maintenance should be revoked due to the wife's alleged employment and misrepresentation. He sought a refund of the entire amount paid since the original order.

The central issue was whether the respondent could seek a refund of maintenance already paid by claiming a change in circumstances. The Supreme Court examined whether Section 25(2) of the Domestic Violence Act allows for such retroactive modifications.

Justice Nagarathna clarified that any alteration, modification, or revocation under Section 25(2) of the Act can only apply from the date the application is made, not retrospectively. The Court emphasized that the respondent's request for a refund of the entire amount paid since 2015 was not maintainable, as the original order had attained finality and could not be undone.

"Revocation or modification of maintenance can only apply prospectively; it cannot relate to periods before the application."

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's remand order and dismissed the respondent’s application for a refund of maintenance. However, it allowed the respondent to file a fresh application for revocation or modification of the maintenance order, but only prospectively.

Date of Decision: September 10, 2024

S Vijikumari v. Mouneshwarachari C​.

Latest Legal News