The main legal point established in the judgment is the modification of guidelines to ensure simultaneous filing of the affidavit after the completion of pleadings in the maintenance application to avoid undue advantage to any party.

J.R. Midha, J.

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act empowers the Court to award maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses to a party who has no independent income sufficient for his/her support in proceedings pending under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, having regard to the income of the parties. The Proviso to Section 24 provides that application under Section 24 shall be disposed of within 60 days of the date of service of notice on the opposite party.

2. Vide judgment dated 14th January, 2015, this Court laid down the guidelines for expeditious hearing and disposal of maintenance applications under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. This Court considered the Best International Practices with respect of the mandatory filing of an affidavit of assets, income and expenditure by both the parties in matrimonial disputes. This Court formulated an affidavit of assets, income and expenditure to be filed by both the parties at the very threshold of the litigation. This Court sought the response of the Courts below on the working of the guidelines and further suggestions. On 29th May, 2017, the guidelines were partly modified. Further suggestions have been received from the learned amicus curiae as well as the Family Court which warrant further modification of the guidelines dated 14th January, 2015 and 29th May, 2017.

3. Mr. Sunil Mittal, learned amicus curiae submits that the affidavit of assets, income and expenditure of the parties be taken after completion of the pleadings, in the maintenance application. It is submitted that the filing of the affidavit along with the petition gives undue advantage to the respondent. It is further submitted that the substantive pleadings get delayed due to the time taken in collecting the documents and filing of the affidavits. Learned amicus curia seeks clarification that the format of the affidavit of assets, income and expenditure has to be used by the Courts as guidelines to determine the income of the parties. It is further suggested that in appropriate cases, the Family Courts should have discretion to dispense with the affidavit or modify the information required from the parties in the affidavit. It is submitted that the litigants belonging to the lowest strata of the society find it difficult to file the affidavit. It is further submitted that the affidavit of assets, income and expenditure may not be necessary in some cases, such as cases where the respondent agrees to pay the maintenance without contesting the application for maintenance or where parties belong to the lowest strata of the society. Reference is made to section 9 and 10 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and Section 28(2) of the Protection of Women form Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which empowers the Courts to formulate such procedure as it deems fit.

4. Ms. Reena Singh Nag, Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court (West) has suggested that instead of the filing of the affidavit along with the petition F.A.O. 369/1996 and the written statement, it would be appropriate to direct both the parties to simultaneously file their affidavits, after the completion of the pleadings, in the maintenance application. It is further suggested that the party seeking maintenance be directed to give the particulars of his/her savings bank account in the maintenance application itself so that the opposite party can be directed to deposit/transfer the maintenance amount directly in that savings bank account.

5. Ms. Anu Narula, learned amicus curiae submits that it is the duty of the Court to make an endeavour to bring reconciliation between the parties in the first instance before proceeding to grant any relief to the parties in matrimonial matters. Reference is made to Order 32A Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; section 9 of the Family Courts Act, 1984; section 23(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and section 34(2) of the