Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Vasu Bajaj – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Bajaj – Respondent
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 226 of 2019
Decided On : 23-08-2023
maintenance - recovery of arrears - Section 125 Cr.P.C - 12 D.V. Act - 19 Family Courts Act - [125 Cr.P.C, 12 D.V. Act, 19 Family Courts Act] - The court addressed the issue of whether an individual's right to recover arrears in maintenance subsists even after the expiry of the period stipulated in section 125(3) Cr.P.C. The court found that a Civil Suit for recovery of maintenance, which acquires the character of a 'debt' once a final Order is made under Section 125 Cr.P.C, is maintainable. The appellant was decreed a sum of Rs.2,05,000/- along with pendent lite and future interest @ 5% per annum till the date of realization.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over the recovery of arrears in maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The appellant, a minor, sought recovery of Rs.2,78,800/- on account of maintenance. The court analyzed the legal provisions and previous judgments to determine the entitlement to recovery of arrears in maintenance.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that a Civil Suit for recovery of maintenance, which acquires the character of a 'debt' once a final Order is made under Section 125 Cr.P.C, is maintainable. The appellant was decreed a sum of Rs.2,05,000/- along with pendent lite and future interest @ 5% per annum till the date of realization.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant's right to recover arrears in maintenance subsists even after the expiry of the period stipulated in section 125(3) Cr.P.C. Another issue was the maintainability of a Civil Suit for recovery of arrears of maintenance granted under the Maintenance Order by the Metropolitan Magistrate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a Civil Suit for recovery of maintenance, which acquires the character of a 'debt' once a final Order is made under Section 125 Cr.P.C, is maintainable. The liability to pay maintenance continues, which may be recovered by any other available modes.
Final Decision: The suit of the appellant was decreed for a sum of Rs.2,05,000/- along with pendent lite and future interest @ 5% per annum till the date of realization. The respondent was granted the liberty to seek the set off of the amount which may have been paid by him during this period over and above the sum of Rs.85,000/- which has already been adjusted.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
The court held that a civil suit for recovery of maintenance, once a final order is issued under Section 125 Cr.P.C, acquires the character of a debt and is therefore maintainable (!) (!) .
The right to recover arrears in maintenance persists even after the expiry of the period stipulated in Section 125(3) Cr.P.C, and such arrears can be recovered through a civil suit (!) (!) .
Maintenance is a social and moral obligation of the husband, and its enforcement is rooted in the relationship of support rather than contractual obligation (!) (!) .
When maintenance becomes due and is crystallized by a court order or decree, it is considered a legal debt, which can be recovered via civil proceedings if not recovered through enforcement mechanisms under the Cr.P.C (!) (!) .
The jurisdiction of civil courts to try suits for recovery of maintenance is not barred by law, provided that the amount due is crystallized by a court order or decree (!) (!) .
The liability to pay maintenance is continuous and can be enforced through any available legal mode, including civil suits, once the amount is determined and due (!) (!) .
The remedy of executing an order for maintenance under Cr.P.C is limited to the period within the prescribed limitation, but the amount owed prior to that period remains recoverable through civil action (!) (!) .
The concept of 'debt' in relation to maintenance is based on the existence of a definite obligation, which, once determined by a court order, becomes a payable amount and thus a debt (!) (!) .
The court emphasized that enforcement of maintenance orders should align with social justice, ensuring dependents receive their due support, and that civil proceedings are a valid remedy for recovery of arrears (!) (!) .
The court's decision was to set aside the earlier judgment dismissing the civil suit and to recognize the suit as maintainable for recovery of the arrears of maintenance, awarding the amount due with interest (!) (!) .
Please let me know if you need further elaboration or specific legal advice related to these points.
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J. This is a case that clamours for the exercise of judicial conscience to address the conundrum of whether an individual's right to recover arrears in maintenance subsists even after the expiry of the period stipulated in section 125(3) Cr.P.C. It warrants our endeavour to determine whether the jurisprudential principle of Ubi jus ibiremedium which posits that every right has a commensurate remedy stands true when it is confronted with the letter of the law i.e. Section 125 Cr.P.C in this instance.
2. An Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is preferred against the judgment dated 17.05.2019 dismissing the suit filed by Smt. Nirmal Bajaj on behalf of minor Vasu Bajaj, for recovery of Rs.2,78,800/- on account of the maintenance by the Ld. Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
3. The facts in brief are that the Smt. Nirmal Bajaj, mother of the Appellant got married to Respondent Shri Rakesh Bajaj on 14.12.1999 according to Hindu Marriage Rites and Ceremonies. One child i.e. Master Vasu Bajaj, the Appellant, was born from the said wedlock on 13.11.2000. Disputes arose between the parties and allegations of being harassed and beaten mercilessly were leveled by Smt. Nirmal Bajaj against the Respondent husband. It was alleged that in January, 2003 when Smt. Nirmal Bajaj was sitting in her room, the Respondent husband and mother-in-law started abusing and beating Smt. Nirmal Bajaj and threw her and the appellant out of the matrimonial home. Thereafter, Smt. Nirmal Bajaj along with her son Vasu Bajaj shifted to a rented premises in West Patel Nagar in February 2003.
4. An application was filed on 25.02.2008 under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "D.V. Act") wherein Smt. Nirmal Bajaj stated that she is working as UDC in Ordinance Depot, Shakurbasti and earning Rs.12,000/- per month. On the other hand, the respondent/husband is employed at State Bank of Patiala, Karol Bagh Branch, Delhi and earning about Rs.35,000/- per month. Smt. Nirmal Bajaj, therefore, sought maintenance in the sum of Rs.20,000/- per month aside from Rs.10 Lakhs as compensation and damages for mental and emotional distress and the right of residence in the matrimonial home.
5. The Respondent had contested the application by asserting that Smt. Nirmal Bajaj was earning more than Rs.16,000/- per month. While denying that his salary was Rs.35,000, he stated that he was merely earning Rs.20,000/- per month, out of which he was paying a sum of Rs.3,700/- per month towards the installment of his car and was also maintaining his dependent mother.
6. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate after considering the evidence of both the parties, granted maintenance @ Rs.5,000/- per month for the Appellant child from the date of petition i.e. 25.02.2008 vide judgment dated 07.01.2010 under Section 12 D.V. Act.
7. The Respondent assailed the said Order by way of an Appeal on 29.01.2010 before the Ld. Sessions Judge, Delhi in Criminal Appeal No.04/2010which was dismissed vide judgment dated 03.08.2010.
8. On the failure of the respondent to pay the monthly maintenance, the appellant filed an Execution Petition under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C for recovery of arrears in maintenance on 23.05.2012. The Order dated 04.07.2012 records that the Respondent tendered a sum of Rs.60,000/- to the Decree Holder and, the execution was disposed of as satisfied.
9. An application for the restoration of the Execution Petition for the balance amount was filed, however, it was dismissed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide Order dated 28.08.2012 with the observations that the execution can be filed within one year of passing of the Order/Accrual of arrears of maintenance. Thus, the appellant herein was entitled to maintenance for the period from 26.05.2011 to 25.05.2012. Since the Execution Petition was neither accompanied with an application fo
A Civil Suit for recovery of maintenance, which acquires the character of a 'debt' once a final Order is made under Section 125 Cr.P.C, is maintainable.
The right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. is a continuing obligation, and while coercive recovery methods are limited to one year, the entitlement to maintenance arrears is not ....
Limitation - Recovery of arrear maintenance - When main petition claiming arrear was pending and kept alive, filing of subsequent petition was only to specify exact amount accrued due upto date. Such....
The right to maintenance under S.125, CrPC is absolute and designed to ensure dignified living for spouses and children, despite claims of financial hardship by the husband.
The obligation to maintain dependents is continuous and independent of other proceedings, rooted in social justice provisions protecting vulnerable individuals.
The court established that enforcement of maintenance orders under Section 125 Cr.P.C. must be pursued through Section 128 Cr.P.C., as the latter provides the appropriate legal framework for such enf....
(1) Right to get maintenance embodies sacrosanct principles of social justice.(2) Liability to maintain is continuous, enforceable, and insulated from considerations of proprietary holdings, flowing ....
Maintenance claims must be enforced within one year of becoming due, with any claims exceeding this period being irrecoverable, as per Section 125(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
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
