Plz send me any judgment on that, is the employed wife entitled
to get maitenance from her employed husband.
need any judgemnt on this topic.
M. NAGA RAJU
testing times (ssa) 04 March 2011
i m also an employed woman with a child. my maintainence application u/s 24 was put aside when i filed it in response of the RCR filed by my husband. he withdrew his petion after about 10 months of filing it. what about the cost i spend over the litigation & lawyer. what can i do now to support my maintainence application again since he has used all my previous earnings( app 2.5 lac) while my stay with him ....they could have atleast acted as some sort of security and saving for me and my child.. i need my money back .....plz help....
i also want to know the manner in which i can get the full reasons and the statement on which he withdrew his case.... plz guide me in right manner so that i could fight for myself and my kid..........
naag (law officer) 04 March 2011
wife filed an application for maitenance under section 125 of Cr.P.C. 1st petitioner is wife and the 2nd petitioner is their son, accused husband is working as government teacher, his reply to the petitioner he contended that wife also working working as Government teacher and drawing handsome salary, after hearing the petitioner the Hon'ble Family Court awarded of Rs 15,00/- and 1000/- respectively. basing on that order again he filed Crl.M.P. for suspending the maitenance to his wife. that was dismissed by the court. frnds please help me any of the Judgments regarding in favour of the Husband.
M. NAGA RAJU
Meena.S (Advocate) 21 March 2011
Pls send me any judgements.
Petitioner is employed and filed a divorce petition, respondent after the filing of the application still resides at the petitioners place. She is well placed at the husbands place including all her daily needs, health etc. She is also a well-qualified and since a year not working, due to reasons well known to her.
At present she is claiming maintenance from the petitioner, inspite that she is residing at the petitioners house itself. can she calim maintenance in this situation, when all her daily needs are looked after by the petitioner itself.
Avnish Kaur (Consultant) 24 March 2011
this double bench judgement of SC shows latest trend of maintenance in eyes of law
In 2011 accepted fact is No maintenance to an able bodied Earning female.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.1789-1790 OF 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C) NOS. 24589-24590 of 2007) Anu Kaul ........ Appellant Versus
Rajeev Kaul ........Respondent ORDER
2) In the appeal filed by the respondent-husband before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by Addl. District Judge (Ad-hoc), Fast Track Court No.3, Faridabad, dated 04.06.2005, the appellant herein had filed an application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for the grant of interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and the litigation expense of Rs. 22,000/- (Rupees Twenty Two Thousand only). The application is partly allowed by the Court by its 1
order dated 23.08.2006, by granting an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expense and a sum of Rs.2,000/- for the maintenance of the minor child living with her. The Review Petition is also dismissed by the Court vide its order dated 21.03.2007, leaving it open to the appellant/applicant to claim interim maintenance before an appropriate forum in the capacity as a Guardian of the child.
3) Challenging both the orders, the appellant-wife is before us in these appeals.
4) Though notice of special leave petition is served on the respondent- husband, for the reason best known to him, has not entered appearance either in person or through his counsel. 5) Marriage between the parties and birth of the female child Karmistha Kaul is not in dispute. The assertion of the appellant in the application filed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 that the respondent is working as a Senior Head of Mukund Steel Ltd., having its head office at Mumbai and drawing a salary of Rs.40,000/- per month and is entitled to claim perks for the education of his children was not denied by the respondent by filing his counter affidavit or reply statement.
6) In the application filed, the appellant admits that she is employed and drawing a salary of Rs.9,000/- per month. However, she asserts, she has to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- by way of rent to the tenanted premises which she is presently occupying in view of the lis between the parties. She has also stated, that, Kumari Karmisatha Kaul is now grown up and she is studying in Senior School and due to insufficient funds, her education is being hampered.
7) A sermon on moral responsibility and ethics, in our opinion for disposing of this appeal may not be necessary, since the respondent has not disputed the assertion of the appellant. However, since the appellant is employed and is drawing a salary of Rs.9,000/- per month, we do not intend to enhance the interim maintenance awarded to her by the High Court during the pendency of the appeal filed by the husband. However, taking into consideration the child being the daughter of highly placed officer, the exorbitant fee structure in good Schools and the cost of living, we deem it proper to direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month to the applicant commencing from 1st of April, 2009 for the maintenance of the minor child during the pendency of the appeals before the High Court. 8) The appeals are disposed of accordingly. 3
March 23, 2009.
ranjit (et) 10 January 2013
Mera naam ranjit hai main ek government employ hoon aur meri gross salry lagbhag 28000/- per month hai .aur mujhe in hand salry lagbhag 21000/- per month ke aas pass milti hai meri wife MNC main senior engineer ki post par kaam karti hai usne crpc125 ke through mujh se maintenance ki demand ki hai aur apni application main salry 15000/- dikhai hai hamara koi kid nahi hai mera aap se ye sawaal hai ki kya is condition main wo interim maintenance ya maintenance ki haqdaar hai aur kya aap koi supreme court/high court ki landmark judgement bata sakte hain .