A wife can claim maintenance under various statutes, but the total amount awarded must consider previous payments to avoid unjust enrichment and double liabilities.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.

Heard Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Baban Prasad, learned counsel for the sole opposite party.

2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting-aside the order dated 21.01.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Palamau at Daltonganj in Original Suit No. 172 of 2023, whereby, the learned Court has been pleased to allow the petition dated 06.08.2024 filed under section 24 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT of the opposite party and directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 20,000/- to the opposite party- wife as litigation cost and further directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month as maintenance for the opposite party and her two minor children till the disposal of the main case.

3. Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-husband has instituted the Original Suit No.172 of 2023 against the opposite party-wife under section 13(1)(i-a) of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 on the ground of cruelty, praying therein to dissolve the marriage by a decree of divorce and to grant the cost of the suit or for any other relief or reliefs. He submits that the Original Suit is pending for evidence of the petitioner and the sole opposite party has also appeared and filed her written statement. He further submits that a petition was filed by the opposite party on 06.08.2024 under Section 24 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 with a prayer of Rs. 10,000/- per month litigation cost and Rs.60,000/- per month maintenance cost for her and her children during pendency of the original Suit. He then submits that the petitioner has filed reply to the said petition filed under Section 24 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT . He submits that prior to the petition filed under Section 24 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT before the learned Court, one Original Maintenance Case No. 31 of 2016 was filed by the opposite party- wife under Section 125 of Cr. P.C against the petitioner-husband, which has been allowed by the learned Court vide order dated 18.05.2018 with direction to pay maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- per month to the opposite party and Rs. 1000/- per month to her two children each from the date of filing of application of maintenance case. He also submits that in the light of said direction, the petitioner is already paying sum of Rs. 4000/- per month to the wife. He further submits that by the impugned order dated 21.01.2025, the learned Court has directed the petitioner-husband to pay sum of Rs.20,000/- to the opposite party-wife as litigation cost and further directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month as maintenance for the opposite party and her two minor children till the disposal of the case. He submits that the learned Court has not taken into consideration the fact that already a sum of Rs. 4000/- is being paid by the petitioner-husband to the opposite party-wife pursuant to the order passed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. He further submits that the maintenance cannot be allowed under two provisions and only one provision for grant of maintenance will prevail. To buttress this argument, he relied upon the judgments passed in the cases of Sangeeta Kumari v. The State of Jharkhand and another , reported in 2017 SCC OnLine Jhar 3046 Sudeep Chaudhary v. Radha Chaudhary , reported in (1997) 11 SCC 286 and in the case of Sandhya Kumari v. The State of Bihar and another , reported in 2000 SCC OnLine Pat 140. Relying on the above judgments, he submits that the learned Court has not directed to adjust the amount of Rs. 4000/- in the petition allowed under Section 24 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT . In view of tha