253 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-639-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 05.02.2026 ASHA AGGARWAL … PETITIONER VERSUS VEENA AGGARWAL ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Mr. Akhilesh Rawat, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gurmandeep Singh Sullar, Advocate for the respondent.

*****

KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 19.01.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram, in proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV/238/2021), whereby the respondent (mother-in-law) was granted ₹

interim maintenance of 1,00,000 per month; as well as for setting aside the order dated 19.12.2024 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram, whereby the appeal filed against the same was dismissed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the daughter- in-law of the respondent. The petitioner after her marriage moved into her matrimonial home, and started residing peacefully. During her stay for three decades, there was no dispute or disagreement between the parties. However, when the petitioner and her husband allegedly started subjecting the respondent to abuse and forced her to vacate the shared household, the respondent filed a petition under the Domestic Violence Act, levelling allegations of abuse, harassment and cruelty. An application under Section 12 of the said Act was also simultaneously filed for grant of interim maintenance allowance. The petitioner filed a reply and contested the claim made by the respondent. The learned Court of JMIC, Gurugram vide order dated 19.01.2024 granted interim maintenance of Rs.1,00,000/- per month in favour of the respondent. The petitioner’s appeal against the said order was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram on 19.12.2024. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned trial Court has allowed the maintenance to the respondent on a very higher side. It is submitted that the trial Court failed to acknowledge that there is no statutory provisions obligating a daughter-in-law to maintain her mother-in- law. Further, the learned trial Court while passing the impugned order did not consider the fact that the petitioner and her husband are also suffering from medical problems, and their consequent incapacity to maintain the respondent. All these facts were similarly overlooked by the learned Addl.

Sessions Judge, Gurugram in appeal.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the learned trial Court had duly considered the material placed before it at the time of deciding the application for maintenance and rightly awarded the maintenance in favour of the respondent, to which she is duly entitled.

The same has also been rightly upheld by the learned Sessions Court.

5. Before adjudicating the present petition, it would be apposite to make a gainful reference to the provision of Section 20 of the Domestic Violence, Act which reads thus:

20. Monetary reliefs (1)While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate may direct the respondent to pay monetary relief to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of the domestic violence and such relief may include, but not limited to, (a)the loss of earnings;(b)the medical expenses;(c)the loss caused due to the destruction, damage or removal of any property from the control of the aggrieved person; and(d)the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any, including an order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force.

(2)The monetary relief granted under this section shall be adeq