Point of law: Maintenance - Grant of maintenance under the DV Act would not be a bar to seek maintenance under Section 24 of HMA -Court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the order impugned so as to make interference by this Court under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 19849. The court below has passed just and reasoned order and no interference is required in the matter

Headnote:
Family Courts Act, 1984 – Section 19 – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Sections 24, 25 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 125 – DV Act – Sections 36, 26, 22, 20, 23 – Maintenance – Interim maintenance -
Finding of the court:
Delhi High Court held that under Section 20(1)(d) of the DV Act, maintenance awarded to the aggrieved woman under the DV is in addition to an order of maintenance provided under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The grant of maintenance under the DV Act would not be a bar to seek maintenance under Section 24 of HMA. – The test for determination of maintenance in matrimonial disputes depends on the financial status of the respondent, and the standard of living that the applicant was accustomed to in her matrimonial home. – The maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic, and avoid either of the two extremes i.e. maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be so extravagant which becomes oppressive and unbearable for the respondent, nor should it be so meagre that it drives the wife to penury. – The sufficiency of the quantum has to be adjudged so that the wife is able to maintain herself with reasonable comfort. – Apex Court set out additional factors for determining the amount of maintenance to be paid, including; the age and employment status of the parties; the duration of the marriage; the maintenance of any minor children; and any serious disability or ill health of a spouse, child from the marriage or dependent relative who requires constant care and recurrent expenditure. – Factors are not exhaustive and the court can exercise its discretion to consider any other factors which may be necessary or relevant in the facts of a particular case – Court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the order impugned so as to make interference by this Court under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 19849. –
Result: Appeal Dismissed

JUDGMENT :

Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

2. Cause shown in the affidavit accompanying the delay condonation application is sufficient. The application is allowed. Office is directed to accord regular number to the appeal.

3. Present appeal has been preferred assailing the validity of the order dated 28.02.2020 passed by Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court No.2, Agra on the interim maintenance application 9-Ga under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) filed in Case No.172 of 2017 (Sunil Sharma v. Smt. Gunjan Kumari) by which the opposite party S(appellant herein) was directed to pay Rs. 5000/-per month as interim maintenance on 10th of each month with further direction that if opposite party is being given maintenance in any other proceeding, the same would be adjusted in this interim maintenance.

4. Brief facts giving rise to present appeal is that the marriage of the appellant (husband) was solemnized with respondent (wife) as per Hindu rites and rituals on 21.11.2015 at Arya Samaj Temple, Raja Ki Mandi, Agra. It is alleged that after the marriage the appellant came to know that before the marriage the respondent had converted herself and practised Muslim religion and was known as Sitara Begum. She married on 10.04.2013 with one Azeem Uddin @ Kunal @ Sameer son of Shri Shamim Ahmad resident of Rajavpur P.S. Rajavpur Distt. J.P. Nagar and out of the said wedlock a son was also born namely Riyan @ Aryan. Later she separated from the said wedlock with compromise and concealing this fact she has remarried with the appellant. When the said fact of her being non-Hindu was revealed she herself left the house of appellant and with the collusion of her parental members she filed a Case No. 329 of 2017 (Smt. Gunjan Sharma & Ors. v. Sunil Sharma & Ors.) under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) in which the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Agra has passed an order on 21.8.2018 directing the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 3000/-per month to the respondent and also pay a sum of Rs. 1000/-to the child of respondent namely Ayran Sharma. It is also contended that as the respondent did not change her religion, her marriage with appellant is null and void. The Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2 has not considered the factual aspect of the matter and passed the order impugned.

5. The matrimonial case no. 172 of 2017 has been filed by the appellant against the respondent under Section 11 of HMA for declaration that the marriage dated 21.11.2015 solemnised between the parties is null and void-ab-initio.

6. While preferring the interim maintenance application 9-Ga filed in Case No. 172 of 2017 the version of the respondent was that after the marriage the appellant has left her in destitution. Once she has requested to keep her with him, he has threatened her of dire consequences. She had pleaded before the court below that she has no income for livelihood and in this backdrop the order impugned has been passed.

7. The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and find that this is admitted situation that the respondent is legally wedded wife of the appellant. This fact has also been admitted by the appellant before the court below that he is earning Rs. 6000/-per month. He has also not been able to prove that the respondent is in any employment. The court below while passing the order impugned has opined that it is the moral and social responsibility of the husband to give maintenance to his wife as per his capacity. In this backdrop the order impugned has been passed.

8. The Court finds that the maintenance laws have been enacted as a measure of social justice to provide recourse to dependant wives and children for their financial support, so as to prevent them from falling into destitution and vagrancy. The legislations which have been framed on the issue of maintenance are the Special Marriage Act, 1954,