SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Pat) 981

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MUNGESHWAR SAHOO, J.
Priyanka Devi - Petitioner
Versus
Kaushal Kishor Gautam - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Jurisdiction No. 915 of 2016
Decided On : 26-09-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Chandra Kant
For the Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Kumar

Headnote:Hindu Marriage Act, 1955–Section 24 read with Code of Civil Procedure, 1908–Order 21 Rule 37–Recovery of arrears of maintenance–no doubt, wife can file a petition under order 21 Rule 37 CPC for recovery of the amount and the husband can be proceeded against the contempt of court also for disobedience of the court's order, but Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act empowers the court to make an order for maintenance and for the expenses to a needy and indigent wife–if the amount is not made available then the very object and purpose of this provision shall be defeated–the orders in not staying the further proceeding till the arrears and current monthly maintenance and litigation cost is paid by the petitioner (husband) will occasion failure of justice and put the wife in a position as if she has not defended the case–the husband is intentionally disobeying the order of the Court–Civil Misc. Application allowed–impugned order set aside–further proveeding in the divorce case to remain stayed till the arrears of maintenance and cost is paid. (Para 14 & 15)

       AIR 1978 HP 45, AIR 1994 Orissa 15, AIR 1962 Cal 88, AIR 1961 Punjab, 42–Referred.

ORDER :

1. I have already heard the learned counsel, Mr. Chandra Kant for the petitioner and the learned counsel, Mr. Rakesh Kumar for the respondent.

2. This Civil Miscellaneous application has been filed by the wife-petitioner for setting aside the order dated 08.06.2016 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, West Champaran, Bettiah in Divorce Case No.138 of 2007 whereby the learned Court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner for recovery of arrears of maintenance amount of Rs.2,27,200 from the respondent-husband and till then stay of proceeding.

3. It appears that the husband-respondent filed the aforesaid divorce case under Section 12(i)(d) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The cases of the parties are not required to be mentioned here. The wife appeared and is contesting the said case. During the pendency of the said divorce case, an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by the wife who is petitioner herein. After hearing both the parties, the learned Family Court by order dated 26.06.2009 directed the husband-respondent herein to pay Rs.4,000 per month as maintenance and also Rs.15,000 lump sum as litigation cost.

4. This order dated 26.06.2009 was challenged before this High Court by the husband in civil revision. The High Court set aside the order and remanded the matter directing to pass a fresh order after recording finding on the question of income of husband. After remand, the Family Court by order dated 13.01.2010 recorded finding about the income and then again directed the husband to pay Rs.4,000 as maintenance and Rs.15,000 as litigation cost. Against the said order, the husband filed CWJC No.20647 of 2011. After hearing both the parties, the said writ application was dismissed on 21.06.2012 which is Annexure 2 to this Civil Miscellaneous application.

5. After the above order, the husband filed an application before the Family Court for recall of the order dated 13.01.2010. The said application was rejected by the Family Judge on 27.07.2013 and the husband-respondent was directed to comply the order.

6. On 02.08.2014, the wife filed application for directing the husband to pay Rs.1,76,000, the arrears of maintenance, stating that because of paucity of money, she is unable to contest the case and if maintenance is not paid, she may be permitted to leave the case. Thereafter, the husband again filed CWJC No.2161 of 2014 which was dismissed on 21.04.2015 and while dismissing this writ application this Court directed the Court below to decide the case within six months. Again, CWJC No.1471 of 2016 was filed by the husband-respondent for directing the Court below to decide the matter as early as possible which was again dismissed by order dated 16.05.2016. Thereafter, the wife-petitioner filed application praying for a direction to the husband to pay the arrears of maintenance as directed by the Court. The arrears of maintenance is Rs.2,27,200/- and the wife has no money to contest the case but the learned Court below by the impugned order rejected the application and proceeded to decide the divorce case.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was passed in the year 2009. After some payment, the husband stopped the payment of maintenance. He challenged the order repeatedly before the High Court which has already been rejected but instead of paying that huge amount of arrear, the husband is proceeding for the disposal of the case expeditiously. The petitioner has no money, therefore, she is unable to contest and if amount is not paid, as directed by the Court, it will be denial of justice to the petitioner.

8. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there is already an order by this Court for expeditious disposal of the divorce case. It is incorrect to say that the wife-petitioner has got no money to contest the suit. According to the learned counsel, the wife is not entitled to get t









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top