The court reaffirmed that a wife can seek maintenance under different statutes post-divorce, with the requirement to disclose previous maintenance orders for equitable adjustments.

JUDGMENT :

B.P. Routray, J.

1. Heard Mr. J.R. Deo, learned counsel for the Appellant-Wife.

2. None appears on call for Respondent-Husband despite notice is made sufficient against him and name of the lawyer is indicated in the cause list.

3. Present appeal has been directed by the Wife against impugned judgment dated 27.12.2021 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Sambalpur in C.P. Case No.26 of 2019.

4. The Wife preferred an application under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act praying for permanent alimony after divorce was granted at the instance of the Husband in C.P. No.22 of 2014. The learned Judge, Family Court rejected the same mainly on two grounds, Viz. she was getting maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month in a proceeding under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and secondly, petition under of the Hindu Marriage Act after grant of divorce is not permitted in view of the continuity of the maintenance granted under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.

5. It is well settled in law that, payment of maintenance under different statutes are at the choice of the party subject to adjustment of the amount of maintenance granted in any other proceeding. The maintenance application decided under one statute would not foreclose the claim for maintenance under another statute. If maintenance has been awarded under one of the statutes that by itself though would not preclude the claimant from raising claim for maintenance under a different statute, but the rider is that the claimant has to disclose all such facts in the subsequent proceeding, and in such case the court entertaining the prayer for maintenance in subsequent proceeding had to adjust and take into consideration the amount of maintenance already awarded earlier under another statute. Particularly in the present case, the Wife preferred the petition under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act after grant of divorce at the instance of Husband, where no alimony was paid in favour of the Wife. Thus the statutory right is there in her favour to exercise her discretion for grant of permanent alimony in terms of of the Hindu Marriage Act, but subject to adjustment of such amount got in any other proceeding for maintenance.

6. In Rajnesh v. Neha and another , (2021) 2 SCC 324 , it is held that;-

“Directions on overlapping jurisdictions

60. It is well settled that a wife can make a claim for maintenance under different statutes. For instance, there is no bar to seek maintenance both under the D.V. Act and Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., or under H.M.A. It would, however, be inequitable to direct the husband to pay maintenance under each of the proceedings, independent of the relief granted in a previous proceeding. If maintenance is awarded to the wife in a previously instituted proceeding, she is under a legal obligation to disclose the same in a subsequent proceeding for maintenance, which may be filed under another enactment. While deciding the quantum of maintenance in the subsequent proceeding, the civil court/Family Court shall take into account the maintenance awarded in any previously instituted proceeding, and determine the maintenance payable to the claimant.

61. To overcome the issue of overlapping jurisdiction, and avoid conflicting orders being passed in different proceedings, we direct that in a subsequent maintenance proceeding, the applicant shall disclose the previous maintenance proceeding, and the orders passed therein, so that the court would take into consideration the maintenance already awarded in the previous proceeding, and grant an adjustment or set-off of the said amount. If the order passed in the previous proceeding requires any modification or variation, the party would be required to m