A divorced wife is not entitled to maintenance under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, as the existence of a valid marriage is a prerequisite.

J U D G M E N T

Sophy Thomas, J.

These appeals arise out of the judgment in O.P No.809 of 2009, on the file of the Family Court, Palakkad. The petitioners in the said O.P are the appellants in Mat.Appeal No.754 of 2012 and the respondent therein is the appellant in Mat. Appeal No.797 of 2012.

2. The wife and children filed O.P No.809 of 2009 under Sections

18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') read with Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 , claiming maintenance-past and future, @ Rs.5,000/- for the 1st petitioner-wife and @ Rs.3,500/- each for the children from the respondent-husband. The Family Court, as per the impugned judgment, rejected the claim of the 1st petitioner-wife, and allowed the claim of the children at the rate of Rs.2,000/- each, and authorised the 1st petitioner-wife to realise that amount on their behalf. Aggrieved by the rejection of the claim of the 1st petitioner and also aggrieved by the quantum of maintenance fixed for the children, the petitioners in O.P No.809 of 2009 preferred Mat.Appeal No.754 of 2012, and the respondent-husband, aggrieved by the past and future maintenance granted to the children, preferred Mat.Appeal No.797 of

2012.

3. The appellant-wife would contend that even though her marriage with the respondent-husband was dissolved, she is entitled for maintenance under Section 18 of the Act. Moreover, the maintenance awarded to the children is not sufficient to meet their daily needs and educational expenses.

4. Per contra, the contention of the respondent-husband is that, he is not having sufficient income to pay maintenance to the children as ordered by the Family Court. Moreover, in an M.C case filed by the wife and the younger child, a settlement was arrived at, in the year 2008 itself, agreeing to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,500/- to the wife, and Rs.1,000/- to the younger child. Since the wife was subjecting him to matrimonial cruelties, he filed Divorce O.P against her, and it was allowed in his favour, dissolving their marriage. Suppressing the M.C case and its settlement, and also suppressing the factum of divorce, the wife and children filed O.P No.809 of 2009. According to him, the appellant-wife was not entitled to get past or future maintenance under Section 18 of the Act, she being a divorced wife.

5. In these appeals, apart from analysing the correctness of the quantum of maintenance awarded to the children by the Family court, we are called upon to answer the crucial question whether a divorced wife is entitled to get maintenance under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 .

6. Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 reads as follows:

18. Maintenance of wife.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime.

(2) A Hindu wife shall be entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim to maintenance.-

(a) if he is guilty of desertion, that is to say, of abandoning her without reasonable cause and without her consent or against her wish, or of wilfully neglecting her;

(b) if he has treated her with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in her mind that it will be harmful or injurious to live with her husband;

(c) if he is suffering from a virulent form of leprosy;

(d) if he has any other wife living;

(e) if he keeps a concubine in the same house in which is wife is living or habitually resides with a concubine elsewhere;

(f) if he has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion;

(g) if there is any other cause justifying her living separately.

3. A Hindu wife shall not be entitled to separate residence and maintenance from her husband if she is unchaste or ceases to be Hindu by conversion to another religion...”.

7. It is true that the term 'wife' is not defined under the Hind