Civil Procedure Code (CPC)

Sc judgement wife can claim additional maintenance in dv act

Housewife

Is there any Supreme court judgement that wife can claim additional maintenance in DV Act?

I could only find judgement of Bombay Highcourt by honble Justice Shukre that women are entitled to additional maintenenace as per sectin 20 (1) (d) of DV act but Magistrate is not accepting this saying that decision of another state Highcourt is not binding upon us and has given me 5 days time to submit a Supreme court judgement if any.

Please help.Thanks.

 
Reply   
 
N.A

No, infact Supreme Court says " Multiple maintenance petition not allowed"


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 


Advocate

The view of magistrate is wrong. Once any issue has been decided by a competent court of law relating to a case between the same parties then the same is debarred to be raised again by the the principle of res-Judicata and also by section 10 CPC. Consult your lawyer.

Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 
Housewife

Maintenance was granted by an exparte order under section 125 Cr.P.C.to me.Husband filed section application under 126.His application was dismissed by family court.I filed 125(3) where recovery warrant was issued .In meanwhile he appealed in highcourt under section 482 and got the case referred to mediation centre by paying a nominal amount from the amount due.Mediation failed .Now next date of listing in highcourt is after a year.Order says he has interim protection till next date of listing.He is not paying me anything.

So in such circumstances also does the principle of res-judicata holds good??As a layman what i understand is that order under section 125 is of no value as it is under challenge and the issue of maintainence between two parties i.e.me and husband is not yet settled.

 

 
Reply   
 

yes there is supreme court judgement

manoj

advocate


8686159292

 
Reply   
 
N.A

Originally posted by : estranged wife
Maintenance was granted by an exparte order under section 125 Cr.P.C.to me.Husband filed section application under 126.His application was dismissed by family court.I filed 125(3) where recovery warrant was issued .In meanwhile he appealed in highcourt under section 482 and got the case referred to mediation centre by paying a nominal amount from the amount due.Mediation failed .Now next date of listing in highcourt is after a year.Order says he has interim protection till next date of listing.He is not paying me anything.

So in such circumstances also does the principle of res-judicata holds good??As a layman what i understand is that order under section 125 is of no value as it is under challenge and the issue of maintainence between two parties i.e.me and husband is not yet settled.

 

 

I do not agree with your view. In support of my advice I am reffering a judgement of Delhi HC. 

Here is an important part of judgement.

"It must be understood that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 does not create any additional right to claim maintenance on the part of the aggrieved person. It only puts the enforcement of existing right of maintenance available to an aggrieved person on fast track. If a woman living separate from her husband had already filed a suit claiming maintenance and after adjudication maintenance has been determined by a competent court either in Civil Suit or by Court of MM in an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. she does not have a right to claim additional maintenance under the Act. The Court of MM under the Act has power to grant maintenance and monetary reliefs on an interim basis in a fast track manner only in those cases where woman has not exercised her right of claiming maintenance either under Civil Court or under Section 125 Cr.P.C. If the woman has already moved Court and her right of maintenance has been adjudicated by a competent Civil Court or by a competent Court of MM under Section 125 Cr.P.C., for any enhancement of maintenance already granted, she will have to move the same Court and she cannot approach MM under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act by way of an application of interim or final nature to grant additional maintenance. This petition is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed."

 

For complete judgement:

 

http://www.delhidistrictcourts.nic.in/Aug10/Rachana%20KathuriaVs.%20Ramesh%20Kathuria.pdf


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 
N.A

But as every judge has its own view you can try as per your understanding.


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Civil Litigation Course     |    x