Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Reserves Verdict in Raju Tampering Conviction Plea
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
A. N. Venugopala Gowda, J.
Ajay Kumar B. R. v. Ranjitha Ray R
1. The parties married on 20.09.2009. Petitioner in W.P. No. 36449/2014 filed M.C. No. 93/2013 in the Family Court, Mysore, under S.13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), to pass decree of divorce. Subsequently, petitioner in W.P. No. 25652/2014 filed MC No. 160/2013, under S.9 of the Act, to order restitution of conjugal rights. I.A. No. 2 was filed in M.C. No. 93/2013, to direct payment of interim alimony by the husband. Finding no merit in the objections filed to the said application, Family Court allowed I.A. No. 2 in part and directed the husband to pay interim maintenance at Rs. 3,500/- p.m. with effect from 03.05.2014. That apart, Rs. 10,000/- was awarded towards litigation expenses. Assailing the said order, husband has filed WP No. 25652/2014 and wife has filed W.P. No. 36449/2014.
2. Mr. K. Abhinav Anand, learned advocate for the petitioner in WP No. 25652/2014, contended that the petitioner in WP No. 36449/2014 having withdrawn from the company of her husband, without any justifiable reason, is unjustified in seeking interim maintenance from his client, who is practising as a junior advocate, in the chamber of a senior advoc
The determination of interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is based on the income of both parties, their capacity to pay, and the factual situation, including caregiving resp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to consider the income of the parties and the paying capacity of the non-applicant when deciding the quantum of interim maintenance under ....
An able-bodied husband cannot seek maintenance from the wife unless he demonstrates a disability that prevents him from earning. It is the duty of an able-bodied husband to maintain himself, the wife....
The court established that an able-bodied husband has a legal obligation to maintain his wife, regardless of his employment status, and that interim maintenance is essential to prevent the destitutio....
Award of interim maintenance to daughter – Christian daughter is entitled to claim maintenance – In absence of any express bar or prohibition, Section 125 of Cr.P.C. could be interpreted as conferrin....
Point of Law : Section 125(1)(b) of Code an unmarried daughter who has physical or mental abnormality or injury whereby unable to maintain herself alone can claim maintenance.
The Court upheld the principle that maintenance pendente lite may be granted based on a comparative assessment of both parties' incomes under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the obligation of the husband to provide maintenance is on a higher pedestal than the wife, and adverse inferences can be drawn against a part....
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
Listen Article