Back
K. LAKSHMAN, P. SREE SUDHA
Esha Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Col. Sameer Sharma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. A. Sai Chandra Haas, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Mudunuri Prudhvi Raj, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The present appeal is filed by the appellant-wife under Section-19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short ‘Act, 1984’) challenging the order dated 08.05.2023 in I.A. No. 1096 of 2022 in FCOP No. 223 of 2021 passed by learned Judge, Principal Family Court, City Civil Court at Secunderabad.
3. The respondent - husband had filed a petition vide FCOP No. 223 of 2021 under Section - 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Section - 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short ‘Act, 1984’) against the appellant-wife seeking decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between them performed on 28.12.2001. During pendency of the said FCOP, the appellant herein-wife has also filed an Interlocutory Application vide I.A. No. 1096 of 2022 under Section - 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking a direction to the respondent herein to pay Rs.1,50,000/- per month towards interim maintenance till disposal of the main O.P. to her and her two minor children and Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses. Vide impugned order dated
The court established that appeals against interim maintenance orders under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act are maintainable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, emphasizing the need for s....
Appeal under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984, would lie against order passed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act for grant of interim maintenance.
The court ruled that appeals under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act are not maintainable against interlocutory orders that do not affect substantial rights.
Interim maintenance orders under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act are interlocutory and not appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.
The court clarified that an order granting visitation rights is an intermediary order, thus appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
Interim custody orders are not appealable under section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, as they are considered interlocutory and do not reflect a final judgment.
A wife's past employment does not negate her current inability to maintain herself; interim maintenance must reflect the husband's financial capacity and the wife's needs.
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
