Patta Without SDM’s Prior Approval Is Void Ab Initio And Cannot Be Cancelled – It Never Legally Existed: Allahabad High Court Natural Guardian Means Legal Guardian: Custody Cannot Be Denied to Father Without Strong Reason: Orissa High Court Slams Family Court for Technical Rejection Affidavit Is Not a Caste Certificate: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside Zila Panchayat Member's Election for Failing Eligibility Under OBC Quota Confession Recorded By DCP Is Legally Valid Under KCOCA – Bengaluru DCP Holds Rank Equivalent To SP: Karnataka High Court Difference of Opinion Cannot End in Death: Jharkhand High Court Commutes Death Sentence in Maoist Ambush Killing SP Pakur and Five Policemen Mere Presence Of Beneficiary During Execution Does Not Cast Suspicion On Will: Delhi High Court Litigants Have No Right to Choose the Bench: Bombay High Court Rules Rule 3A Is Mandatory, Sends Writ to Kolhapur Testimony Must Be of Sterling Quality: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Grandfather in Rape Case, Citing Unnatural Conduct and Infirm Evidence Cheating and Forgery Taint Even Legal Funds: No Safe Haven in Law for Laundered Money: Bombay High Court Final Maintenance Is Not Bound by Interim Orders – Section 125 Determination Must Be Based on Real Evidence: Delhi High Court Contempt | Power to Punish Carries Within It the Power to Forgive: Supreme Court Sets Aside Jail Term for Director Who Criticised Judges Over Stray Dog Orders Seizure and Attachment Are Not Twins: Supreme Court Holds Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts in PC Act Cases Using CrPC Section 102 IBC | Pre-Existing Dispute Must Be Real, Not Moonshine: Supreme Court Restores Insolvency Proceedings, Says Admission Cannot Be Rejected Based on Spurious Defence Summons Under FEMA Are Civil in Nature – Section 160 CrPC Has No Role to Play: Delhi High Court Denies Exemption to Woman Petitioner from Personal Appearance Before ED Clear Admission in Ledger Is Sufficient for Summary Judgment: Delhi High Court Decrees ₹16.77 Cr in Favour of MSME Supplier Mere Allegation Under SC/ST Act Doesn’t Bar Bail When No Public Abuse Is Made Out: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Caste Atrocity Case Consent Of Girl Aged Above 16 Is Legally Valid Under Pre-2013 Law: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Rape Conviction Insurer Entitled to Recover Compensation from Owner When Driver Has No Licence or Fake Licence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Applies ‘Pay and Recover’ Doctrine Courts Cannot Rewrite Contracts Where Parties Have Failed to Clearly Define Property Terms: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Appeal in Specific Performance Suit Even Illegal Appointments Cannot Be Cancelled Without Hearing: Patna High Court Quashes Mass Termination Of Absorbed University Staff 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’

Stepchildren ordered to pay reduced maintenance amount to stepmother by Karnataka High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Karnataka High Court has issued a ruling stating that a stepmother can claim maintenance from the legal heirs of her deceased husband if it is proven that her husband possessed a substantial number of properties, and the legal heirs were extracting income from them.

In this particular case, the High Court was hearing a petition filed by stepchildren seeking to set aside and quash the order of the Family Court, which had directed them to pay Rs. 25,000/- per month as maintenance to their stepmother. The Counsel for the petitioners had argued that the stepmother was not covered under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) as she was not a natural/biological mother, and therefore not entitled to maintenance under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007 (the "Act"). It was also submitted that the maximum amount that could be granted as maintenance was Rs. 10,000/- per month.

The High Court, however, held that even though the definition of stepmother was not defined under Section 125 of the CrPC, the stepmother was covered in the definition of 'parents' under Section 2(d) of the Act. Therefore, the stepmother would be entitled to maintenance, but she would have to approach the Tribunal under the Act and would also have to produce evidence and documents in order to show that her husband was having a lot of properties and the petitioners were making income out of those properties.

The Bench of Justice K. Natarajan referred to the decision of a coordinate bench of the High Court in the case of Ulleppa and Ors. Vs Smt. Gangabai and observed that "as there are huge properties held by the husband of the stepmother of these petitioners, and they are having income, therefore, the step-mother is also entitled to maintenance." The Bench further held that "the order of granting maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- by the Family Court as interim maintenance is not sustainable, and the matter is required for evidence to be recorded, documents to be marked by the petitioner/stepmother in order to show her husband is having a lot of properties and they are having income. Though the respondent is receiving rent of Rs. 4,000/-, she is having a divorced daughter and granddaughter, therefore, the petitioner requires to agitate the same before the Family Court and also she can claim maintenance in the Senior Citizen Act. Such being the case, granting Rs. 25,000/- per month without recording the evidence is not sustainable."

Accordingly, the High Court modified the order of granting maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- per month until the disposal of the case by the trial court. The family court is directed to record the evidence of the parties and decide the issue and dispose of the matter in accordance with the law, taking into account the Senior Citizen Act and Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.

Khaleel Ul Rehman & Ors. vs. Sharaffunnisa Muniri @ Ashaf Unnisa

Latest Legal News