-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
The appellant, a minor daughter represented by her mother, had challenged the High Court’s order that reduced her maintenance from ₹20,000 to ₹7,500 per month. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court’s decision failed to consider the established guidelines for determining maintenance, leading to an insufficient ruling. “The manner in which maintenance payable... is to be assessed, was considered by this Court in its celebrated judgment in Rajnesh v. Neha... Detailed guidelines were issued,” the Supreme Court observed.
The Apex Court has reiterated the procedural guidelines laid down in the landmark case of Rajnesh v. Neha, which mandates a uniform format for the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities in all maintenance proceedings. The court criticized the lack of adherence to these guidelines and directed the Secretary General to recirculate the judgment to ensure its implementation at all levels of the judiciary.
In the court’s ruling, it was emphatically stated that “the impugned order passed by the High Court is cryptic and is bereft of reasons.” The Supreme Court has sent back the case to the High Court, ordering a detailed reassessment. This move underscores the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring the welfare of the child and the enforcement of fair and justified maintenance awards.
The recirculation of the Rajnesh v. Neha judgment is also a significant step towards streamlining the process of maintenance adjudication, highlighting the court’s proactive stance in safeguarding the interests of dependents in matrimonial disputes. The decision has sent a clear message that maintenance cases, especially those involving children, require careful scrutiny and adherence to legal protocols to ensure justice is served.
Date of Decision: 06 November 2023
ADITI ALIAS MITHI VS JITESH SHARMA
[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/06-Nov-2023-Aditi-Vs-Jitesh.pdf"]
