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

2007 Supreme(Del) 853

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
BHARAT HEGDE – Appellant
Versus
SAROJ HEGDE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.N.BHATT, S.K.Dubey, Sanjay Sahrawat, TARUN KAMBOJ


PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) I do not intend to catalog the various decisions under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. It would be sufficient for me to note the judicial principles required to be applied while deciding an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.

( 2 ) SINCE the Section relates to entitlement of the appellant spouse to receive interim maintenance from the non-applicant spouse, it is obvious that the focus of enquiry has to be the means of the applicant spouse to maintain him/her self as also the financial means of the non-applicant spouse. The issue of conduct or misconduct of either spouse is irrelevant for the reason, in every proceedings for divorce, dissolution or judicial separation, there is bound to be some allegations or the other pertaining to matrimonial misconduct. Thus, if conduct or misconduct were to be considered, no spouse would get any interim maintenance under Section 24.

( 3 ) THE Section contemplates a summary enquiry and not a trial at length.

( 4 ) RIGHT to maintenance is an incident of the status from an estate of matrimony. Interim maintenance has an element of alimony, which expression in its strict sense means
































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top