Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
G.R.Majithia, J.
Om Parkash
Versus
Chander Wati Alias Chanderpali
of,
C.R. No. 855 of 1989,
Decided On : OCTOBER 11, 1990
Sec.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act - Maintenance Pendente Lite - The court has the authority to fix maintenance pendente lite under Sec.24 of the Act, even if proceedings under Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are pending. The order under Sec.24 of the Act can be enforced like a decree.
Fact of the Case:
The wife filed a petition under Sec.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the husband and also filed an application under Sec.24 of the Act for interim maintenance for her and her children. The Matrimonial Court fixed maintenance pendente lite and assessed litigation expenses.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the revision petition against the order of the Matrimonial Court, stating that the submissions made by the husband's counsel were devoid of force. The court found the maintenance and litigation expenses to be just and fair, and therefore, dismissed the revision petition.
Issues: The issues raised were whether maintenance pendente lite could be fixed when an application under Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was already filed, and whether the Matrimonial Court had the authority to fix maintenance under Sec.24 of the Act when no proceedings under the Act were pending.
Ratio Decidendi: The filing of a petition under Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not debar the Matrimonial Court from fixing maintenance pendente lite under Sec.24 of the Act. The order under Sec.24 of the Act can be enforced like a decree, and no proceedings under the Act need to be pending for the court to fix maintenance under Sec.24.
Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
, J.
1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the Matrimonial Court passed on a petition filed by the wife under Sec.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for brevity the Act),
2. The wife filed a petition under Sec.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the husband. She also filed an application under Sec.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for fixing interim maintenance for her and her three children aged 8, 5 and 3 years. The Matrimonial Court on appraisal of the material placed before it fixed maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.500/-per month and assessed litigation expenses at Rs.1000/-.
3. The husband has come up in revision petition against the order of the Matrimonial Court and the counsel made two submissions, namely, (i) maintenance pendente lite ought not to have been fixed since the wife had already filed an application under Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (ii) no proceedings under the Act were pending before the Matrimonial Court.
4. These submissions are devoid of any force. The filing of the petition under Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not debar the Matrimonial Court, from fixing maintenance pendente lite under Sec.24 of the Act. If the Court fixes maintenance under Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the husband will be entitled to claim adjustment for the maintenance paid pendente lite under Sec.24 of the Act. The order passed by the Matrimonial Court under Sec.24 of the Act cannot be rendered negatory because no proceeding under the Act was pending. The order under Sec.24 of the Act can be enforced like a decree.
5. On merits, I have gone through the order of the Matrimonial Court. The maintenance fixed pendente lite and the litigation expenses assessed appear to be just and fair and call for no interference. Revision petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
