judgment?

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The parties have already led their respective evidences. At such stage, the husband filed an application before the learned trial Court, seeking direction against the wife to file affidavit, disclosing her assets and liabilities. The wife contested the prayer and finally vide impugned order dated 5.9.2022, the learned trial Court rejected the prayer.

3. Though the learned trial Court took notice of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha & another (supra), however, it came to the conclusion that the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment shall apply only for the purpose of deciding applications for interim maintenance, where no evidence was available and when the parties have already led evidence, the necessity of seeking affidavits in terms of the ratio of judgment in Rajnish’s case (supra), may not be necessary.

4. While issuing final directions in the matter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha & another, in para No. 129, has held as under:-

“The Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities annexed as Enclosures I, II, and III of this judgment, as may be applicable, shall be filed by both parties in all maintenance proceedings, including pending proceedings before the Family Court/District Court/magistrates Court concerned, as the case may be, throughout the country.”

5. On a plain reading of aforesaid dictum, there remains no doubt that the requirement of disclosure of assets and liabilities by way of affidavit was foreseen only for the case of interim maintenance. It has clearly been spelt out that the disclosure affidavits shall be filed by both the parties in all maintenance proceedings including pending proceedings before the Family Court/District Court/magistrates Court concerned, as the case may be throughout the country.

6. Thus, the learned trial Court has misread the mandate of Rajnesh vs. Neha & another (supra) and on this score, the impugned order cannot be sustained.

7. Even otherwise, although, the evidence has been led by the parties, filing of disclosure affidavits will not cause prejudice to either of the parties and rather shall enable the Court to pronounce on the rights of the parties with more authentic material.

8. In result, the impugned order is set aside. The application of husband is allowed. For the compliance of mandate in Rajnesh vs. Neha & another, both the parties are directed to submit their respective affidavits, disclosing assets and liabilities, before learned trial Court, strictly in terms of the directions issued in the aforesaid judgment. The affidavits shall be filed by both the parties within four weeks from today and thereafter, the learned trial Court shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.

9. In the aforesaid terms, the petition stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(Satyen Vaidya)

27th April, 2023 Judge (kck)