Now  spouse (husband or wife) can claim maintenance from the date on which the application for maintenance was filed: Supreme Court
Family Dispute

Now spouse (husband or wife) can claim maintenance from the date on which the application for maintenance was filed: Supreme Court

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 730 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.9503/2018)

Referred Acts in the Judgement:

  • The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973
  • The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DVA), 2005
  • Hindu Marriage Act (HMA), 1955
  • Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954
  • Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAMA), 1956

 

Summary of the Case:

The Wife (Neha) filed an interim application u/s 125 CrPC claiming maintenance for herself and their son by her husband (Rajnesh). Family Court granted her a favourable Order of Rs.15,0000/- p.m. and Rs.5,000/-p.m. to their child to be paid by the Husband (Rajnesh). This Order was challenged by the Husband by way of a Criminal Writ Petition in Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) wherein the Court affirmed the Order of the Family Court and dismissed the Criminal Writ Petition. Husband lastly appealed to the Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Court awarded additional costs and relevant Order in maintenance of the Wife and their son by the Husband and also provided detailed guidelines on the fourth issue amongst the five (5) problems mentioned in the judgment that is issue of date from which maintenance to be awarded. 

In this Judgement Hon’ble Supreme Court observed and analysed all the precedents and regulatory frameworks used to decide a date from which maintenance can be awarded.

 

What should be the date from which Maintenance to be Awarded?

Hon’ble court observed that since there is no uniform regime and there are multiple practices adopted by the family courts across the country to decide the date from which the maintenance can be awarded. Hon’ble court also observed that there are three possibilities mostly adopted as the maintenance date:

a) Date on which the application for maintenance was filed;

b) Date of the order granting maintenance;

c) Date on which the summons was served upon the respondent.

 

Hon’ble court observed various precedent & judgements from different family courts and reached to the conclusion that family matters take a lot of time for their disposal and this delay is not in favour of justice and against the human rights & basic dignity of the individual.

Hon’ble court also provided the rationale for the above direction that it will enable the wife to survive  the financial tough time because if a dependent spouse loses its financial strength then it became very challenging to represent themselves before the court.  

The Honorable Supreme Court has provided clear guidance to ensure uniformity and consistency in the rulings of all courts, stating that the date on which a maintenance application is filed shall be regarded as the date from which maintenance can be granted. The Court further noted that the right to claim maintenance should be retroactive to the date of the application's submission, as the duration of the maintenance proceedings, while pending, is beyond the control of the applicant. 

 

Read the judgement here:                   https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2018/37875/37875_2018_39_1501_24602_Judgement_04-Nov-2020.pdf

Unmarried major Daughter if Physically Or Mental sound is Not Entitled To Claim Maintenance From Father U/s 125 Of CrPC: Supreme Court.
Family Dispute

Unmarried major Daughter if Physically Or Mental sound is Not Entitled To Claim Maintenance From Father U/s 125 Of CrPC: Supreme Court.

Referred Sections in the Judgement:

 

Case number: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 615  of 2020 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.8260/2018)

  • Section 125 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
  • Section 20 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 3(b)
  • Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Key happenings in the matter Chronologically:

1. Judicial Magistrate: (16.03.2011)

This matter was first filed u/s 125 CrPC claiming maintenance by Ms Abhilasha’s mother  (Abhilasha  is the one who filed the current matter in Supreme Court) from her husband (father of Abhilasha) for herself and her three children (one of them was Abhilasha). The learned Judicial Magistrate by their judgment dated 16.02.2011 dismissed the application under Section 125 allowed the grant of maintenance for Abhilasha till she attains majority.

2. Session Judge: (17.02.2014)

The above judgement was challenged before the court of Session Judge. This was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by order dated 17.02.2014 and the Hon’ble Judge midified the order  and said that Abhilasha  shall be entitled to maintenance till 26.04.2005 when she attains majority.

3. Punjab Haryana High-Court (16.02.2018)

The above order was challenged through an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. which was was filed before the  Punjab Haryana, High court. High Court through its judgment dated16.02.2018 dismissed the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and said that previous both courts were correct in their judgement and said that Abhilasha was entitled to get maintenance till she is attaining majority and not thereafter since she is not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or injury. High Court also said that in such a situation when a child, who though has attained majority but is unable to maintain itself only then is entitled to get maintenance.

4. Supreme Court: (2020)

Abhilasha Appealed against the High Court’s judgement in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court also dismissed the appeal and confirmed that Abhilasha is not entitled for maintenance from here father. Hon’ble Supreme Court also reaffirm that under Section 125 of Cr.P.C an unmarried Hindu daughter can claim maintenance from her father till she is married or attained majority.  If she proves that that she is unable to maintain herself only in that situation she can claim maintenance.

Read the complete judgement here: 

https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2018/34880/34880_2018_35_1501_23965_Judgement_15-Sep-2020.pdf