S.B.SINHA, CYRIAC JOSEPH
Amarendra Kumar Paul – Appellant
Versus
Maya Paul – Respondent
What is the maintenance obligation under Section 125 CrPC for children who have attained majority? What is the period of limitation for filing an execution application under Section 125(3) CrPC, and how does an order stay affect it? What is the entitlement of the wife and children to maintenance during interim periods, and how are arrears and past payments to be treated?
Key Points: - The maintenance obligation under Section 125 CrPC for minor and certain categories continues until attainment of majority for children; after majority, the provision ceases to apply to their cases. (!) - For execution of maintenance orders, the period of limitation is one year from the date the amount became due, but exclusion periods apply under Section 15 of the Limitation Act when stay orders are in place. (!) (!) (!) - Arrears can be sought for periods prior to the majority/marriage of children, with specific exclusions and adjustments for periods post-majority or where earlier orders denied maintenance; appeals and revisions may affect entitlement. (!) (!) (!) (!) - Interim maintenance provisions allow for maintenance and expenses during pending proceedings; such interim orders may be disposed of within sixty days where possible. (!) - The Court recognized that no maintenance order was passed in favor of children after they attained majority, so recovery of maintenance for those post-majority periods does not arise. (!) (!) - The final order excludes the period from May 1997 to April 1998 for the daughters where earlier order had been rejected, setting specific maintenance periods for each child. (!)
Judgment :-
S.B. Sinha, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Appellants herein are aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 23rd July 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court whereby and whereunder the order dated 15th February 2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Berhampore, in Execution Case No.186 of 2005 for execution of an order passed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, `the Code) was upheld.
3. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The 1st respondent is the wife of the appellant herein. They have three children. 1st respondent herein filed an application in the year 1984 for grant of maintenance in terms of Section 125 of the Code not only on her own behalf but also on behalf of her two minor daughters, viz., Bandhu Priya Paul and Bandhu Priti Paul as also her minor son, viz., Bandhu Prakash Paul from February 1983. Pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof an order was passed in her favour by a learned Magistrate on 24th August 1987 directing payment of maintenance @ Rs.500/- per month in favour of 1st respondent and @ Rs.125/- per month for the three minor children.
An application f
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.