Back
RAVINDRA MAITHANI
Jitendra Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
The challenge in this revision is made to the order dated 26.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 214 of 2021, Km. Rashmeet Kaur v. Jitendra Pal Singh, by the court of Judge, Family Court I, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. By the impugned order, an application for interim maintenance filed by the respondent no. 2 (“the private respondent” – she is minor daughter of the revisionist) has been allowed and the revisionist has been directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month interim maintenance to her.
2. This case has a history. Initially, in the year 2012, an application for maintenance was filed by the mother of the private respondent, for herself and for the private respondent, seeking maintenance from the revisionist. It was registered as Family Suit No. 88 of 2012, Smt Saranjeet Kaur and another v. Jitendra Pal Singh (“the case”). The case was decided on 20.09.2014 and the revisionist was directed to pay total Rs. 8,000/- per month to the private respondent and her mother, as maintenance.
3. It appears that in the meanwhile, the mother of the private respondent, who was wife of the revisionist, filed an FIR against the revisionist and others, in
The settlement between parties in a maintenance case does not necessarily settle the claims of the minor child, and the minor child cannot be deprived of the right to claim maintenance.
Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. must reflect the financial status of the husband and the needs of the wife, ensuring adequate support for her living expenses.
The discretion of the Magistrate in awarding maintenance and the need to prevent vagrancy and destitution were the central legal principles established in the judgment.
The main legal point established is the obligation of a party to comply with Supreme Court guidelines on affidavit of disclosure in maintenance proceedings and the statutory mandate for timely dispos....
The obligation of a husband to maintain his wife and child is both legal and moral, requiring consideration of the immediate needs of dependents despite financial claims.
Onus is on husband to establish with necessary material that there are sufficient grounds to show that he is unable to maintain the family and discharge his legal obligations for reasons beyond his c....
Point of law: “An agreement, by which wife relinquishes her right to receive maintenance any time in future, is contrary to public policy and consequently unenforceable.”
A wife can seek maintenance under different statutes; non-disclosure of interim maintenance in previous proceedings cannot bar her claim.
A minor can be required to pay maintenance obligations upon reaching majority, reflecting the need for reasonable support based on actual income.
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
