NDPS | Mentioning FIR Number On Memos Before Registration Makes the Entire Recovery Suspect: Himachal Pradesh High Court MACT | Once Deceased Is Proven To Be Skilled Worker, Deputy Commissioner's Wage Notification Is Applicable: P&H HC Bank’s Technical Excuses Can’t Override Employee’s Right to Ex Gratia Under Old Circulars: Bombay High Court Slams Canara Bank’s Rejection of Claim Once Worker Files Affidavit of Unemployment, Burden Shifts to Employer to Prove Gainful Employment: Delhi High Court Grants 17B Relief Despite 12-Year Delay Specific Relief Act | Readiness and Willingness Must Be Real and Continuous — Plaintiffs Cannot Withhold Funds and Blame the Seller: Bombay High Court Even If Claim Is Styled Under Section 163A, It Can Be Treated Under Section 166 If Negligence Is Pleaded And Higher Compensation Is Claimed: Supreme Court When Cheating Flows from One Criminal Conspiracy, the Law Does Not Demand 1852 FIRs: Supreme Court Upholds Single FIR in Multi-Crore Cheating Case Initiating Multiple FIRs on Same Facts is Impermissible: Supreme Court Quashes Parallel FIRs and Grants Bail Protection in Refund Case Limitation Act | Quasi-Judicial Bodies Cannot Invoke Section 5 Principles Without Express Statutory Grant: Supreme Court Arbitration Act | Commencement of Proceedings Triggered by Notice Receipt, Not Section 11 Filing: Supreme Court Strong and Cogent Evidence Must Exist at the Threshold to Deny Bail Under Section 319 CrPC: Supreme Court Appellate Court Under Section 37 Cannot Sit in Appeal Over Arbitral Award on Merits: Supreme Court Affidavit Ratifying Power of Attorney Cannot Be Disowned Later: Supreme Court Orders Specific Performance Despite Earlier Revocation Claims No Law Empowers a Corporation to Haunt a Retiree: Supreme Court Quashes Post-Retirement Disciplinary Action for Want of Jurisdiction Mere Expectation of Higher Bids Can't Justify Cancelling a Valid Auction: Supreme Court Quashes GDA’s Arbitrary Rejection of Highest Bidder Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21, Even in Grave Economic Offences: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Arvind Dham in ₹673 Crore PMLA Case Article 14 | ‘Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midstream’: Supreme Court Quashes Punjab’s Modified Sports Quota Policy for MBBS Admissions Rules of the Game Cannot Be Changed Midway: Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s Retrospective Recruitment Amendment "Imaginary Ghost" - Court Permits Karthigai Deepam at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’: Madras High Court 353 IPC | Continuing Prosecution Against Citizens Despite Statutory Findings of Police Atrocities Is Abuse of Process: Kerala High Court Court Cannot Compel Plaintiff to Continue Suit Where No Liberty to File Fresh Suit is Sought: Bombay High Court Claim for Demurrage is Not a Crystallized Debt—Only an Unadjudicated Right to Sue: Andhra Pradesh High Court Declared Foreign Nationals Have No Right to Reside in India: Gauhati High Court Upholds Expulsion of Bangladeshi Woman Without Requiring Deportation Protocols At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court “Possession Follows Title” Not An Absolute Rule When Ownership Is Disputed: Andhra Pradesh High Court ORDER 30 CPC | Appeal Filed by Firm Does Not Abate on Death of Partners: Calcutta High Court Bank Cannot Freeze Customer’s Account Based on Third-Party Dispute: Calcutta High Court Slams Axis Bank

Supreme Court Modifies Maintenance Order: Appellant Concealed Compensation Receipts

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has modified a maintenance order in a case involving maintenance granted to a wife and son. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay S. Oka and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal on September 22, 2023, addressed the appellant's challenge to the High Court's modification of the maintenance order.

The High Court had altered the maintenance order to make it payable from the date of the application for maintenance, a decision contested by the appellant. The appellant argued that the maintenance granted was excessive, and there were concerns regarding the starting date for payment.

During the proceedings, it was revealed that the appellant had concealed compensation amounts received by him, significantly impacting the assessment of maintenance. Compensation amounts of Rs. 42,20,202/- and Rs. 11,36,861/- were received by the appellant due to the acquisition of his property. Furthermore, an affidavit filed by the appellant disclosed that he had received a total compensation of Rs. 82,33,531/- between January 2003 and June 2012.

In light of this concealed information, the Supreme Court ordered that the maintenance payable by the appellant from July 1, 2012, should be at the rate of Rs. 45,000/- per month, as per the Family Court's order dated November 19, 2018. However, for the period from the date of filing the application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) until June 30, 2022, the total amount payable by the appellant to the respondent No. 1-wife and child shall be at the rate of Rs. 25,000/- per month.

The judgment concluded by specifying that the arrears as of the date of the judgment shall be paid by the appellant to the respondent No. 1-wife within a three-month period, with adjustments made for amounts previously paid by the appellant, including a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs paid pursuant to a previous order.

This judgment highlights the importance of full and honest disclosure of financial information in maintenance cases and serves as a significant legal precedent in matters of maintenance modification.

Date of Decision: September 22, 2023

DHIRENDER KUMAR vs BALA & ANR.     

 

Latest Legal News