Power to Strike Off Defence for Non-Payment of Interim Maintenance - The Supreme Court and various High Courts have consistently held that the defence of a respondent (usually the husband) can be struck off in proceedings related to maintenance if there is willful and contumacious default in paying interim maintenance. The courts emphasize that this is a last resort measure to uphold the majesty of the court and ensure compliance with maintenance orders. ["2025 0 Supreme(Ori) 517"], ["2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 971"], ["2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 538"], ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 674"], ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 478"], ["Smt. Sangeeta Grover vs Ranjan Grover - Allahabad"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 9942"], ["
Smt. Sangeeta Grover vs Ranjan Grover - Madhya Pradesh
"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 24955"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14894"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 271"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 1378"], ["2022 0 Supreme(MP) 282"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(HP) 753"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 2390"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 62781"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 10542"]Conditions for Striking Off Defence - The courts have clarified that the default must be deliberate, willful, and contumacious. Merely failing to pay interim maintenance does not automatically justify striking off the defence; the default must be established as intentional and persistent. When such default is proven, courts have the authority to strike off the defence to facilitate speedy disposal of cases ["2025 0 Supreme(Ori) 517"], ["2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 971"], ["2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 538"], ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 674"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 9942"], ["
Smt. Sangeeta Grover vs Ranjan Grover - Madhya Pradesh
"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 24955"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14894"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 271"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 1378"], ["2022 0 Supreme(MP) 282"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 10542"].Jurisdiction and Limitations - Some courts have noted that the power to strike off defence is not explicitly provided under Chapter IX of the Criminal Procedure Code or under Section 125 of the Hindu Marriage Act, but is recognized as a procedural measure available to Family Courts to ensure enforcement of maintenance orders. However, in certain cases, courts have also held that such drastic measures should be used cautiously and only as a last resort ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 674"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14894"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 271"], ["2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 1378"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 10542"].
Effect of Non-Payment and Court’s Discretion - When the default is established, the courts have affirmed that the defence can be struck off, which leads to the case proceeding without the respondent’s participation in defence. This is intended to prevent delays and enforce compliance with maintenance orders. Nonetheless, courts have also recognized that in some instances, remedies such as filing applications for execution or recovery are more appropriate than striking off defence ["2025 0 Supreme(Ori) 517"], ["2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 971"], ["2024 0 Supreme(P&H) 538"], ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 674"], ["2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 9942"], ["
Smt. Sangeeta Grover vs Ranjan Grover - Madhya Pradesh
"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 24955"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The consensus across the cited judgments is that the appellate courts and Family Courts have the authority to strike off the defence of a husband or respondent for non-payment of interim maintenance, but only under specific conditions—primarily, willful and deliberate default. Such measures serve to uphold the enforcement of maintenance orders and ensure swift justice, but are considered a last resort after other remedial avenues have been exhausted or deemed insufficient. The courts emphasize caution in exercising this power, ensuring it aligns with legal provisions and procedural fairness.