Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

Wife can seek maintenance under many laws, but amount will be adjusted- Karnataka HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Karnataka High Court regulations, a wife may request maintenance under two or more different statutes, however the amount will be adjusted proportionally.

The case contesting the Family Court order providing interim support of Rs. 30,000 per month to be given to his wife/respondent was being handled by the Justice M. Nagaprasanna bench.

In this case, the petitioner and respondent were wed but did not have any children together. The respondent registers a crime for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506, 313 and 34 of the IPC, alleging harassment by the petitioner and members of his family.

The respondent then submits a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to the Civil Judge and JMFC, Moodbidri, in which maintenance is also requested.

The relevant Court issues an order giving maintenance to the respondent/wife at a rate of Rs. 20,000 per month after taking into account the interim application for maintenance.

The petitioner challenges the stated ruling before the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, who dismissed it, alleging that the decree was made without consulting the spouse.

A petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is preferred by the petitioner, who is enraged by both proceedings. and the Court issues a temporary order stopping any further lawsuits brought under the DV Act.

Whether or if the Family High Court's order requires interference.

The bench cited the ruling in Rajnesh v. Neha, where it was said that "in light of jurisdictional overlap, the provision of support under Section 20(1)(d) of the DV Act would be in addition to the maintenance granted under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and further declares that neither the DV Act nor Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. prohibit the pursuit of maintenance. or even under the 1956 Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, or the Hindu Marriage Act.

According to the High Court, the petitioner must support his wife by making interim maintenance payments. There is nothing wrong with the court's ruling providing the wife this support; it was properly issued.

The bench dismissed the petition in light of the aforementioned.

Uday Nayak vs Anita Nayak 

Latest Legal News