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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Jagdish Pabreja - Appellant
Versus
Shalu Pabreja - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 3818 of 2022 & Crl.M.A. 15951 of 2022 (stay)
Decided On : 02-11-2022




Executing courts must adhere strictly to original decrees unless ambiguity arises; they can interpret, not modify, extant orders regarding maintenance from a specific application date.

Headnote:(A) Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Section 23 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Challenge to orders on interim maintenance - Executing Court's jurisdiction and authority discussed - Executing Court wrongly set operational date for maintenance from 24.06.2013; it exceeded jurisdiction as no explicit application for such clarification was made - Court clarified that maintenance must be awarded from the date of application, consistent with statutory provisions. (Paras 1, 2, 12, 16)

(B) Maintenance - Criteria for determining date of applicability and calculation - The nuances of maintaining the rights of parties as specified in prior judgments emphasized; execution courts must adhere to original decrees unless ambiguity arises, providing scope for interpretation. (Paras 7, 10, 13)

Facts of the case:
The petition arose from a domestic violence case where the petitioner contested interim maintenance orders since 2019, questioning the retrospective application of the 2019 order based on various prior applications filed by the respondent.

Issues: Whether the Executing Court exceeded its jurisdiction in clarifying the operational date of maintenance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that executing courts cannot go beyond the decree but can interpret it in the case of ambiguity. The manner in which the date of reckoning for maintenance was set was improper without proper consideration of prior proceedings.

Result: The matter is remanded back to the Executing Court for reconsideration of the application and objections.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. The instant petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India read with Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 filed by petitioner assails the orders dated 25.04.2022 and 26.05.2022 ("impugned orders") passed by learned MM, Mahila Court (West) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi ("Executing Court") in Execution No. 124/2019.

2. The Executing Court, vide order dated 25.04.2022, held that the order granting interim maintenance passed on 22.03.2019 is operational from the date of filing the application under Section 23 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ("DV Act") which was moved on 24.06.2013. The petitioner herein was further directed on 26.05.2022 to pay Rs.1,00,000/- out of the arrears of Rs.3,18,000/- by 06.06.2022.

3. Brief facts leading to the filing of instant petition, as disclosed in the petition, are detailed as under:

3.1. As the relationship between the petitioner/husband and respondent/wife became estranged, a case under Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was filed by the wife in the year 2011, and vide order dated 22.03.2019 on application filed by wife seeking interim maintenance, maintenance was granted to her.

3.2. The wife had filed several applications for grant of interim maintenance taking contradictory pleas and seeking contradictory reliefs. She also did not address arguments on the initial application seeking interim maintenance despite several opportunities given to her. Thereafter, the matter had been listed for evidence vide order dated 13.01.2015. Another application was filed by the wife on 16.12.2016 seeking interim maintenance.

3.3. The wife had been residing in the house of her mother-in-law i.e. mother of the petitioner herein, however in compliance of Judgment and Decree passed on 10.11.2017 by Civil Judge-04 (West) Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Civil Suit filed by mother-in-law of the respondent, the respondent had vacated the said house. After vacating the said house, the wife again filed another application dated 20.11.2017 for grant of interim maintenance and order of residence.

3.4. After hearing arguments on the application dated 16.12.2016 an interim order on maintenance was passed on 22.03.2019, thereby awarding interim maintenance of Rs.3,000/- each to the respondent and the minor child, totaling Rs.6,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application. The learned Trial Court held that this amount includes the rental charges for the suitable accommodation as well, if any, from the date of her vacation from the matrimonial home. It was also ordered that the school, conveyance and stationery and uniform expenses of the minor child will be borne by the petitioner separately.

3.5. Thereafter, an execution petition no. 124/2019 claiming an exaggerated and incorrectly calculated amount of Rs.5,28,000/- from the date of 23.12.2011 till 22.04.2019 was filed. The petitioner/husband filed objection to the execution petition on 22.08.2019 stating that the amount has been wrongly and erroneously calculated on the incorrect basis from the date of filing of the petition under Section 12 of DV Act.

3.6. The wife filed another application on 21.12.2020 i.e., after 19 months for seeking clarification of the time period about the applicability of interim order dated 22.03.2019. The petitioner filed his reply to the said application and the learned Trial Court while dealing with the objections filed by the petitioner herein in the execution proceedings disposed of the objections and held that the order dated 22.03.2019 is operational from the date of filing of the application under Section 23 of DV Act i.e., 24.06.2013.

3.7. During the execution proceedings on 26.05.2022, the learned Trial Court directed the petitioner to pay Rs.1,00,000/- out of arrears of Rs.3,18,000/-. The petitioner paid Rs.1,00,000/- on 06.06.2022 through Bankers Cheque bearing No. 056803 dated 03.06.2022 in the name of wife/respondent, with application for praying th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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