Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

Divorced wife is entitled to get maintenance

Divorced wife is entitled to get maintenance, whatever may be the reason for divorce

 
 
The phraseology used in Explanation (b) to Section 125(1) of the Code would not
admit of creating classes of divorced wives. A divorced wife is a
divorced wife, whatever may be the reasons for divorce and
whatever may be the procedure adopted or forum chosen. If wife
divorced on the ground of desertion, who has a better reason to be
disentitled, because a husband cannot be said to have refused or
neglected to maintain her, is held entitled to maintenance as
divorced wife, since she herself deprived husband of the chance to
maintain her, wives divorced for other reasons would certainly be
entitled to be maintained
Bombay High Court
Smt. Gita W/O Chandrashekhar ... vs Sushree Geeta D/O Ramnath Sharma on 20 January, 2009
Bench: R. C. Chavan
Date of Pronouncing the judgment : 20-1-2009
Take a look at Judgment : https://www.lawweb.in/2012/04/divorced-wife-is-entitled-to-get.html
 


Learning

 15 Replies

bhima balla (none)     01 April 2012

The cause for divorce and behaviour of the parties must be a consideration for permanent maintenance in any case. In cruelty and desertion wife is taking benefit of her own fault and is 'rewarded' with maintenance? This is an abomination in my opinion. I wonder what the rationale is for awarding such maintenance?

Manav Kalia (Arguing my own cases..)     01 April 2012

The rationale under CrPC 125 and HMA u/s 24 is different..

Arvind Singh Chauhan (advocate)     01 April 2012

If in divorce proceeding there is finding that wife without any reasonable cause living apart from husband, which resulted in desertion or cruelty. maintenance under 125 may be refused, because many courts held " Finding of civil court is binding on criminal court.

Manav Kalia (Arguing my own cases..)     01 April 2012

I agree @ arvind

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     02 April 2012

The right to maintenance is not absolute, not even in 125.

 

Why divorce was granted would be a factor in 125 as well.

 


Regards,
 
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

bhima balla (none)     02 April 2012

Shonee, Could you please elaborate on your comments.Thanks!

bhima balla (none)     02 April 2012

Also the problem is CrPC 125 or DV act maintenance is sought much before divorce suit-which usually takes a long time.And maintenance under these are given much before any decision of civil courts. My question also pertains to whether permannet maintenance is given based on factors for which divorce was granted and the behaviour of parties during marraige? I can understand interim but what about permanent maintenance? What is the current direction higher courts are leaning towards and the rationale for it?

bhima balla (none)     02 April 2012

Also is CrPC 125 case maintainable once permanent alimony/ maintenance granted after divorce?

Manav Kalia (Arguing my own cases..)     02 April 2012

Bhima, woman can apply for maintenance under CrPC 125, HMA u/s 24, and DV. Woman can get granted maintenance from all three places. But she can claim maintenance from only one relief granted to her. That is, if she already has maintenance from one of the three places then she would have to give it up to claim permanent alimony. She cannot get maintenance from more than one source..

Nadeem Qureshi (Advocate/ nadeemqureshi1@gmail.com)     02 April 2012

Dear Querist

according to 

125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents.

 

 

(1) If any person leaving sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain-

 

(a) His wife, unable to maintain herself, or

 

(b) His legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or

 

(c) His legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself, or

 

(d) His father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself,

 

A Magistrate of' the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate1[***] as such magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct::

 

Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of' sufficient means.

 

2[Provided further that the Magistrate may, during the pendency of the Proceeding regarding monthly allowance for the maintenance under this sub-section, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the interim maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, and the expenses of such proceeding which the Magistrate considers reasonable, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct:

 

Provided also that an application for the monthly allowance for the interim maintenance and expenses for proceeding under the second proviso shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of the service of notice of the application to such person]

 

Explanation. For the purposes of this Chapter.

 

(a) Minor means a person who, under the provisions of the Indian Majority Act, 1975 (9 of 1875) is deemed not to have attained his majority;

 

(b) "Wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband and has not remarried.

 

3[(2) Any Such allowance for the maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be payable from the date of the order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be.]

 

(3) If any Person so ordered fails without sufficient cause to company with the order, any such Magistrate may, for every breach of the order, issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may sentence such person, for the whole, or any part of each month's4[ allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case be,] remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made:

 

Provided that no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due under this section unless application be made to the court to levy such amount within a period of one year from the dare on which it became due:

Provided further that if such person offers to maintain his wife on condition of her living with him, and she refuses to live with him, such Magistrate may consider any grounds of refusal stated by her, and may make an order under this section notwithstanding such offer, if he is satisfied that there is just ground for so doing.

 

Explanation. If a husband has contracted marriage with another woman or keeps a mistress, it shall be considered to just ground for his wife's refusal to live with him.

 

(4) No wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance from her husband under this section she is living in adultery, or if, without any sufficient reason, she refuses to live with her, husband, or if they are living separately by mutual consent.

 

(5) On proof that any wife in whose favour an order has been made under this section is living in adultery, or that without sufficient reason she refuses to, live with her, husband, or that they are living separately by mutual consent, the Magistrate shall cancel the order.

 

1. The words "not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole" omitted by Act 50 of 2001, sec.2 (w.e.f. 24-9-2001).

 

2. Ins. by Act 50 of 2001, sec.2 (w.e.f. 24-9-2001).

 

3. Subs. By Act 50 of 2001, sec 2, for sub-section (2) (w.e.f. 24-9-200).

 

4. Subs. By Act 50 of 2001, sec 2, for "allowance" (w.e.f. 24-9-200).

 

STATE AMENDMENTS

 

Madhya Pradesh:

 

In section 125, in sub-section (1), for the words "five hundred rupees" the words m' "three thousand rupees" shall be substituted.

 

[Vide M.P. (Act 10 of 1998), sec. 3 (w.e.f. 29-54998)] [Ed. This amendment has been I made prior to the enactment of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2001 W (Central Act 50 of 2001) whereby the words "not exceeding five hundred rupees in the I whole" have been omitted by sec. 2 (w.e.f. 24-9-2001)].

 

Maharashtra:

 

In Section 125,-

 

(a) in sub-section (1),-

 

(i) for the words "not exceeding five hundred rupees" the words "not I exceeding fifteen hundred rupees" shall be substituted;

 

(ii) before the existing proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-

 

Provided that, the Magistrate on an application or submission being made, supported by an affidavit by the person who has applied for the maintenance under this sub-section, for payment of interim maintenance, on being satisfied that, there is a prima facie ground for making such order, may direct the person against whom the application for maintenance has been made, to pay a reasonable amount by way of interim maintenance to the applicant, pending the final disposal of the maintenance application:

 

Provided further that, such order for payment of interim maintenance may, in an appropriate case, also be made by the Magistrate ex parte, pending service of notice of the application, subject, however, to the condition that such an order shall be liable to be modified or even cancelled after the respondent is heard in the matter:

 

Provided also that, subject to the ceiling laid down under this sub-section, the amount of interim maintenance shall, as far as practicable, be not less than thirty per cent of the monthly income of the respondent.";

 

(iii) in the existing proviso, for the words "Provided that" the words

"Provided also that" shall be substituted;

 

(b) after sub-section (2), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely:-

 

(2A) Notwithstanding anything otherwise contained in sub-sections (1) and (2), where an application is made by the wife under clause (a) of sub-section (1) for the maintenance allowance, the applicant may also seek relief that the order may be made for the payment of maintenance allowance in lump-sum in lieu of the payment of monthly maintenance allowance, and the Magistrate may, after taking into consideration all the circumstances obtaining in the case including the factors like the age, physical condition, economic conditions and other liabilities and commitments of both the parties, pass an order that the respondent shall pay the maintenance allowance in lump-sum in lieu of the monthly maintenance allowance, covering a specified period, not exceeding five years at a time, or for such period which may exceed five years, as may be mutually agreed to, by the parties.";

 

(c) in sub-section (3),-

 

(i) after the words "so ordered" the words, brackets, figures and letter "either under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2A), as the case may be," shall be inserted;

 

(ii) after the words "each month's allowance" the words "or, as the case may be, the lump-sum allowance to be paid in lieu of the monthly allowance" shall be inserted.

 

[Vide Maharashtra Act, 21 of 1999 sec. 2 (w.e.f. 20-4-1999)] [Ed. These amendments have been made prior to the enactment of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Central Act 50 of 2001) sec. 2 (w.e.f. 24-9-2001)].

 

Tripura:

 

In section 125, for the words "five hundred rupees" the words "one thousand five hundred rupees" shall be substituted.

 

[Vide Tripura Act, 9 of 1999 sec. 2 (w.e.f. 9-4-1999}] [Ed. This Amendment has been made prior to the enactment of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Central Act 50 of 2001) whereby the words" not exceed of five hundred rupees in the whole" have been omitted by sec. 2 (w.e.f. 24-9-2001)].

 

STATE AMENDMENTS

 

West Bengal:

 

In Sub-section (1) -

 

For the words "five hundred rupees" the words "one thousand and five hundred rupees" shall be submitted.

 

(2) After the existing proviso, following proviso shall be inserted, namely.

 

"Provided further that where in any proceeding under this section it appears to the Magistrate that the wife referred o in clause (a) or the minor child referred to in clause (b) or the child (not being a married daughter) referred o in clause (c) or the father or the mother referred o in clause (d) is in need of immediate relief for her or its or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, the Magistrate may, on the application of the wife or the minor child or the child (not being a married daughter) or the father or the mother, as the case may be, order the person against whom the allowance for maintenance is claimed, to pay to the petitioner, pending the conclusion of the proceeding the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such allowance as having regard to the income of such person, it may seem to the Magistrate to be reasonable.

 

[Vide West Bengal Act 25 of 1992 (w.e.f. 2-8-1993)] [Ed. This Amendment has been made prior to the enactment of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Central Act 50 of 2001) whereby the words "not exceed of five hundred rupees in the whole" have been omitted by sec. 2 (w.e.f, 24-9-2001)].

 

[Vide W.B. Act 25 of 1992 (w.e.f. 2-8-1993)

 and accoding to 

 

24. Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.-

 

Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the court to be reasonable:

 

1[Provided that the application for the payment of the expenses of the proceeding and such monthly sum during the proceeding, shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the wife or the husband, as the case may be.]

 

COMMENTS

 

Consideration for amount of maintenance

 

The court is required to take into consideration the income of the parties before deciding the quantum of the interim maintenance. The court has to keep in view the need of the applicant and paying capacity of the non-applicant; Padmavathi v. C. Lakshminarayana , AIR 2002 Kant 424.

 

Consideration for fixing maintenance pendente lite

 

(i) As far as maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings are concerned, no distinction has been made under section 24 of the Act relating to right of a wife for maintenance preferred under section 12 or 13 of the Act; Sandeep Kumar v. State of Jharkhand , AIR 2004 Jhar 22.

 

(ii) The divorce proceeding has terminated adversely to his client but an appeal is pending. Whether the appeal ends in divorce or not, the wife's claim for maintenance qua wife under the definition contained in the explanation (b) to section 125 of the code continues unless parties make adjustments and come to terms regarding the quantum or the right to maintenance. It is clear that mere divorce does not end the right to maintenance; Captain, Ramesh Chander v. Veena Kaushal , AIR 1978 SC 1807.

 

Entitlement for maintenance

 

(i) During the pendency of the divorce proceedings at any point of time if the wife establishes that she has no sufficient independent income for her support, it is open to her to claim maintenance pendente lite; Manokaran v. Devaki , AIR 2003 Mad 212.

 

(ii) Section 24 entitles not only the wife but also the husband to claim maintenance pendente lite on showing that he has no independent source of income. However, the husband will have to satisfy the court that either due to physical or mental disability he is handicapped to earn and support his livelihood. Held that since the husband was able-bodied and was not mentally ill and only because his business had closed down, he could not be granted any maintenance, it being opposed to spirit of section 24 of the Act; Kanchan v. Kamalendra, AIR 1993 Bom 493.

 

Maintenance & expenses during pendency of proceedings

 

Provisions of section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for support to be given by the earning spouse in favour of non-earning spouse during the pendency of proceedings before the court. Therefore an application seeking for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by a dependent spouse is definitely one which can be allowed in an application under section 24; R. Suresh v. Chandra M.A. , AIR 2003 Kant 183.

 

Scope

 

(i) Pending an application either under Rule 5 of Order 9 or Rule 9 of Order 9 or Rule 13 of Order 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure a spouse is entitled to maintain an application under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The expression “proceedings under the Act” appearing in section 24 cannot be given a narrow and restrictive meaning; Vinod Kumar Kejriwal v. Usha Vinod Kejriwal , AIR 1993 Bom 168.

 

(ii) Section 125(1)(d) has imposed a liability on both the son and the daughter to maintain their father or mother who is unable to maintain himself or herself; Dr. Vijaya Manohar Arbat v. Keshireo Rajaram Sawai , AIR 1987 SC 1100.

 

(iii) The direction by the Civil Court is not a final determination under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act but an order pendente lite under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to pay the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioners own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the Court to be reasonable; Captain Ramesh Chander v. Veena Kaushal , AIR 1978 SC 1807.

 there is many diffrences between both the section and the maintenance can not be fix in every case it's depend case to case.

feel free to call

Manav Kalia (Arguing my own cases..)     02 April 2012

Thanks @ nadeem

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     03 April 2012

Manav, The ceilings have been abolished in all states. Regards, Shonee Kapoor harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
1 Like

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     03 April 2012

When the divorce is granted on fault grounds, the condition 5 of 125 is violated. The lady was not staying away with sufficient cause.

 

 

Regards,

 

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

1 Like

(Guest)

Divorce wife is entitle to get Maintenance.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register