Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI, S.H.SHETH
A.Suseelamma - Appellant
Versus
A.Raghunadha Reddy - Respondent
Decided On : 11-12-76
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 24, 21, 151 CPC - STAY OF TRIAL - INTERIM MAINTENANCE - JURISDICTION OF COURT - INHERENT POWER.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-wife filed a petition for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in a petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the respondent-husband. The court granted interim maintenance and legal expenses, but the husband defaulted on payments. The wife filed an application to stay the trial of the main petition until the arrears of maintenance were paid, but the court dismissed the application, holding that it had no jurisdiction to stay the trial in the absence of a condition in the maintenance order stating that the main petition would not be proceeded with if the maintenance was not paid.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the lower court erred in refusing to stay the trial of the main petition solely on the ground that there was no condition attached to the interim maintenance order. The court found that the lower court had inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, made applicable to proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act by Section 21 of the Act, to stay the trial of the main petition until the interim maintenance order was complied with.
Issues: 1. Whether the lower court had jurisdiction to stay the trial of the main petition in the absence of a condition in the interim maintenance order stating that the main petition would not be proceeded with if the maintenance was not paid. 2. Whether the lower court's refusal to stay the trial was a failure to exercise jurisdiction or an exercise of jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the lower court had inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to stay the trial of the main petition until the interim maintenance order was complied with. The court reasoned that the purpose of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which provides for interim maintenance, would be frustrated if the other party was allowed to proceed with the main petition while ignoring the direction for payment of interim maintenance. 2. The court found that the lower court's refusal to stay the trial was a clear case of refusal to exercise its jurisdiction. The court noted that the lower court had refused to exercise its jurisdiction solely on the ground that the interim maintenance order did not contain a condition that the main petition would not be proceeded with if the order was not complied with, but the court had held that such a condition was not necessary for the court to have jurisdiction to grant a stay.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, treating it as a civil revision petition, and set aside the lower court's order refusing to stay the trial of the main petition. The court directed that the trial of the main petition be stayed until the arrears of interim maintenance were paid.
( 2 ) THE court below dismissed that petition holding that when the order for interim maintenance was made, the court did not impose any condition stating that if the interim maintenance was not paid, the main o. P. would either be dismissed or not proceeded with, anj in the absence of such a condition the court cannot either stay or postpone the trial of the O. P
( 3 ) IT is against that order this appeal has been filed. Sri Raghu- nadha Reddy, the learned Counsel for the appellant contends that the court below was wrong in holding that it had no jurisdiction to stay the O. P. in the absence of any condition imposed in the order awarding interim maintenance stating that if the interim maintenance is not paid the O. P. would not be proceeded with. He submitted that the provisions of the Civil procedure Code are made applicable under section 21 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 to all proceedings of the Act and one of the such provisions being section 151, the Civil Court had inherent jurisdiction under the section to stay the trial of the O. P. if the interim maintenance directed to be paid was not paid. We are inclined to agree with this submission. As stated earlier, section 21 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 provides that all proceedings under the Act shall be "regulated, as far as may be, by the code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It is true that decrees or orders made under the Act can be enforced and the appellant was entitled to execute the decree for interim maintenance, but that remedy is not inconsistent with a request made by her that the O. P. shall not be proceeded until and unless the interim maintenance is paid to her. The grant of the interim maintenance was made in pursuance of the powers under Section 24 of the Act which provides that if the court is of the view that the wife has no independent income sufficient for her support, it may order the husband to pay to her monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to her income and the income of the husband, it may seem to the court to be reasonable. This section is intended to enable the wife or the husband as the case may be) to have sufficient funds to proceed with the o. P. and to maintain herself during the pendency of the O. P. The very purpose of this section will be frustrated if the other party is allowed to proceed with the O. P. ignoring the direction for payment of interim main- tenance In those circumstances, it would be a proper exercise of the jurisdiction under section 151 C. P. C. which is attracted by reason of Section 21 of the Act to postpone the hearing of the O. P. or stay the trial of the O. P. until and unless the order of the court is carried out. It is well settled that the court has inherent jurisdiction to make such orders wihch would make effective the orders passed by it. There is no provision in the Act which says that unless there is a condition imposed while granting interim maintenance that the O. P. , would not be proceeded w
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
