Maintenance to daughter: Supreme Court has taken age as a factor for enhancement [Read the Order]

Supreme Court has enhanced the maintenance amount of a daughter considering her age. The order was passed by a three judges bench in the case titled ANIRBAN GHOSH vs SANCHITA GHOSH on 03.12.2019.

Supreme Court observed and held as under:

"We have heard Mr. Ashim Kr. Banerjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, who has submitted that in compliance of Order dated 05.10.2018, the appellant is regularly paying the maintenance of Rs.15,000/- to the daughter every month either by way of Demand Draft or by way of Cheque.

Since the daughter is stated to be aged about 16 years, in modification of Order of this Court dated 05.10.2018, we direct the appellant to pay the maintenance of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) per month to the daughter, instead of Rs.15,000/- as ordered earlier, in the same manner, either by way of RTGS or by way of Demand Draft/Cheque, until further orders from this Court. In case of any difficulty, the appellant is at liberty to make a mention".

Read the Order here:

Wife is entitled for current market value if husband fails to return the ornaments [Read the SC Order]

Supreme Court in the case titled as Priya Prabhakaran vs D Santhosh Kumar on 06.12.2019 has held that if husband fails to return the gold items to wife, he has to pay the value of the gold on the date when repayment is made and not in respect of the date of application filed by the wife.

Supreme Court observed and held as under:

"The main issue which falls for determination in the present appeal is whether the High Court was justified in modifying the order of the appellate court by restricting the value of fifty one sovereigns of gold at Rs 4,59,000, the value which was quantified on the date of the filing of the application.

Having heard Mr V Shekhar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr Joseph Aristotle S, learned counsel appearing for the respondent and Mr.Nishe Rajen Shonkar, learned counsel for the State, we are of the view that there was no justification for the High Court to modify the order which was passed by the first appellate court.

The appellant sought the return of her gold ornaments weighing fifty one sovereigns and, in the alternative, the money equivalent which was quantified at Rs 4,59,000 on the date of the filing of the application.

Read also : Maintenance to daughter: Supreme Court has taken age as a factor for enhancement [Read the Order]

The Trial Court did not grant the relief which was sought but in appeal the Additional District and Sessions Judge correctly directed the return of fifty one sovereigns of gold or, in the alternative, the equivalent of their current market value.

The order of the High Court directing the first respondent to pay an amount of Rs 4,59,000 which was the value in 2008 will result in a miscarriage of justice.

If the first appellant cannot have the return of the fifty one sovereigns of gold in her possession she is entitled to the refund of the value of the fifty one sovereigns on the date of the repayment. Mr Shonker has placed on record the applicable rates for gold which are not in dispute. The value of fifty one sovereigns (equivalent to 480 gms) works out to Rs 15,25,920".

Read also : Abandonment or Abuse of Parents/Senior Citizens to be made a Punishable Offence, [Read the Bill]

Unmarried daughter who is above 18 can claim maintenance from father: High Court

An unmarried daughter is entitled to claim maintenance from her father even after attaining the age of 18 if her parents are divorced or estranged, the Bombay High Court has ruled.

Also, a woman can file an application on behalf of her major daughter to seek maintenance, Justice Bharti Dangre ruled yesterday.

Till the time the children were minors, their father paid a monthly maintenance for each child to their mother.

However, after the daughter crossed 18 years of age, the father refused to pay maintenance for her.

ADVERTISEMENT

Her mother, in her petition in the high court, claimed that though her daughter had attained majority, she was still financially dependent on her as she was pursuing higher education.

The woman also said that her two sons were not in a position to help out, as one of them was repaying his education loan and the other was yet to get a job.

ADVERTISEMENT

The woman, who is getting a monthly maintenance of Rs 25,000 from her husband, sought additional Rs 15,000 for the daughter.

The family court rejected her plea, saying that under section 125 (1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), maintenance is to be paid only for minor children.

Justice Dangre said in her ruling that as per the CrPC a major child is entitled for maintenance only if he or she is not able to maintain herself or himself due to any physical or mental problem.

But past judgements of Supreme Court and high courts have held that an unmarried major daughter can also seek maintenance if she is not financially independent (even if she doesn't suffer from any disability), the judge noted.

She directed the Principal Judge of the family court to consider th

The decree of divorce dissolving the marriage solemnised in India on the grounds of mutual consent by a court in NZ is very much valid in India and based on that the individuals can remarry anyone as per their desire. ... We have also filed in a court.

• Mutual divorce from foreign. I got married in 2010 through special marriage act. After few months my husband went to NZ for higher studies. We never had cohabitation since we wanted to wait till social marriage which was supposed to be done in 2012-13. But in between we started facing so many issues and we both decided to part away. Now the thing is that I am in India and he is in NZ .he is having PR over there. We want to finish it quickly because we both want to settle down soon. According to him it is so fast if we done from NZ court.we will go for mutual divorce only. Now my question is , is this divorce will be valid in India. Will I have to face any difficulties if I remarry someone else in India after that divorce which will be ordered from NZ court? I am eagerly waiting for your reply. Thanks in advance.

Asked 4 years ago in Family Law from Bangalore, Karnataka

Religion: Hindu

We have also filed in a court. But our lawyer suggested to go for contested one and now it has became exparte.which is taking unnecessary long time. We are having no trust on the procedure .it is almost 2 year we have filed.no result yet.

Asked 4 years ago

In your case The divorce in Newsland court is not valid.the main reason is you are not domiciled and permanently resident NZ.More over the jurisdiction assumed by the foreign court as well as the ground on which the relief is granted must be in accordance with the matrimonial law under which the parties are married. The exceptions to this rule may be as follows: (i) where the matrimonial action is filed in the forum where the respondent is domiciled habitually and permanently resides and the relief is granted on a ground available in the matrimonial law under which the parties are married; (ii) where the respondent voluntarily and effectively submits to the jurisdiction of the forum as discussed above and contests the claim which is based on a ground available under the matrimonial law under which the parties are married; (iii) where the respondent consents to the grant of the relief although the jurisdiction of the forum is not in accordance with the provisions of the matrimonial law of the parties.

So better to apply divorce in Indian Court under Section 28 of the Special marriage Act, 1954 .And with draw the contesting case which you have filed 2 years before.

A petition for divorce may be presented to the District Court by both the parties together on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.

Secondly on the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to it in sub-section (1) and not later than 18 months after the said date, if the petition is not withdrawn in the meantime, the District Court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnised under this Act, and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.

 you sir for your prompt response.actually he is having permanent residentship of NZ. So can it be filed by him?

Asked 4 years ago

1. If both of you go for mutual consent divorce, then it is recognised and valid in India.

2. Even contested divorce on the grounds of Cruelty/Adultery/Desertion/Impotency are grounds that Indian Law recognises, so if the divorce is granted on these grounds – The decree is valid in India. Please note that in such a case it need not be validated in India by filing a suit or anything. It is the burden of person challenging the decree to discredit it.

3. You can remarry someone else in India after the divorce decree from NZ court.

4. The court shall take submissions of both sides into consideration before deciding the case – if it is not done – then decree does not hold good in India. In other words both spouses have to be present in the court.

5. If there is no consummation of marriage, both of you can opt for Annulment of marriage, wherein technically it will be considered that the marriage had not taken place and you will be treated as unmarried for all practical purpose and there will be no need of taking divorce.

. The ex parte divorce granted in NZ will not be valid in India. Hence I can't suggest you for the same.

2. The best option is to file mutual divorce in NZ which will be valid in India very much.

3. If the mutual divorce in NZ takes more than six months then apply for the same in India which doesn't take more than six months time.

All the best.

) divorce obtained by mutual consent in New Zealand would be valid in India

2) you are free to remarry in India after obtaining divorce

1) since your husband has permanent residency in New Zealand he can file for divorce in New Zealand

Quick solution to your concern is to ask him to come down to India toake appearance in the case, you have filed 2 years back so that you both can go for mediation and settle the matter amicably. After the settlement agreement drawn up, case will be converted in to mutual consent petitin and decree of dissolution will be granted.

As you are in India and he is in NZ hiw you can get Mutual consent divorce in NZ.?

Ask him to come down to India for fifteen days so that both of you can finish the legal aspects pending from years.

The quickest divorce in India will be by mutual consent which will take at least 6 months to get the marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce through a court. However this is not the situation in a foreign country when India couple approach a court in a foreign country where they live. In countries like US, UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, if the Indian couple decide to divorce or dissolve their marriage by mutual consent, it will be completed within a month.

Now to your questions;

We want to finish it quickly because we both want to settle down soon. According to him it is so fast if we done from NZ court.we will go for mutual divorce only. Now my question is , is this divorce will be valid in India. Will I have to face any difficulties if I remarry someone else in India after that divorce which will be ordered from NZ court?

The decree of divorce 

Supreme Court: No maintenance for wife who is working for sufficient salary

Supreme Court has declined to award any maintenance to wife who was working with sufficient salary, however, it awarded maintenance to the daughter.

A bench of Justice Shantanagoudar and Justice Khanna has passed the order in the case titled as KUSUM BHATIA vs SAGAR SETHI on 16.09.2019.

A decree was passed on 21.03.2009 in HMA 128/2008 by Additional District Judge (ADJ), Delhi, whereby the learned ADJ while allowing the petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the HMA, has passed a decree of dissolution of marriage in favour of the husband and against the wife.

Wife challenged the decree before the High Court. After detalied discussion, the High Court uphled the divorce saying "The parties have lived apart for approximately 10 years. Various police complaints /CAW Cell complaints were filed by the appellant and the family members of the respondent. There appears to be no possibility of the revival of the matrimonial relationship between the parties, and the relationship between the parties has irretrievably broken down. The marriage is as good as dead. The irretrievable breakdown is the result of the conduct of the appellant and the respondent/husband is entitled to a decree of divorce under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Act".

Wife then challenged the order before the Supreme Court which dismissed the petition. However, before dismissing the petition, the Supreme Court dealt with the issue of maintenance.

Read also : Domestic Violence vs Section 125 CrPC: Both are independent proceedings [Read the Order]

Supreme Court observed and held "Having heard learned counsel for both the sides on merits, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order. In our considered opinion, the interest of justice would be met if the child, Kumari Preksha (aged about 16 years as of now) is awarded maintenance. Since, the petitioner is a working lady with sufficient salary, we decline to award any maintenance in her favour

most important Judgments related to 125 Cr.P.C.*_

_*9 most important Judgments related to 125 Cr.P.C.*_

**************************

1. 125 CrPC cannot be filed twice, only 127 CrPC is allowed. (High Court Gujrat), Bench Hbl J. M. R. Shah, Order on 30-08-2011, Cr RA/69/2011 8/8, Revision Appeal No. 69 of 2011, Chauhan Anjanaben Jayantibhai Vs Chauhan Kanaiyalal Mohanlal.(Chauhan vs Chauhan)

2. No Multiple maintenances are allowed. (High Court Gujrat), Bench Hbl J. Akhil Kureshi, order on 21-10-2010, Special Appeal No. 2080 of 2010, SCR. A/2080/2010, 2/2, Hemlataben Maheshbhai Chauhan Vs State of Gujarat.

3. Multiple petitions of maintenance are not allowed. (High Court Delhi), Hbl J. Shiv Narayan Dhingra, order on 30-08-10, Crl. M. C. No. 130/2010 and Crl. M. A. No. 504/2010, Rachna Kathuria vs Ramesh Kathuria. Citation No. 173 (2010) DLT 289.

4. Double Jeopardy. Same relief of maintenance cannot be asked twice in two different courts. Litigant cannot ride two horses. (High Court Mumbai), Bench Hbl B. Wahane, J. Order on 17-07-1991. Ravindra Haribhau Karmarkar Vs Mrs. Shaila R. Karmarkar. Citation No. 1992 Cri LJ 1845.

5. Separate income of wife can be taken in to account in determining the amount of maintenance payable to her. (Supreme Court), Bench Hbl JJ. Sarkaria R. Singh, Chandrachud Y.V., Gupta A.C., Order on 17-10-1974, Bhagwan Dutt Vs Kamla Devi and Ors. Citation Nos. 1975 AIR 83; 1975 SCR (2) 483; 1975 SCC (2) 386; Citator R 1986 SC 984 (5), R 1987 SC 1100 (5).

6. No parallel 125CrPC and DVA for maintenance. (High Court Delhi), Bench Hbl J. Shiv Narayan Dhingra, order on 22-09-2010, Crl. R. P. No. 633 of 2010, Crl M. A. No. 15451/ 2010, Renu Mittal Vs Anil Mittal & Ors. Citation No. 173 (2010) DLT 269.

7. Interim maintenance increase illegal. (Supreme Court), Bench Hbl JJ. B.N. Agarwal and G. S. Singhvi, Order on 23-02-2009, Civil Appeal No. 1163/2009, SLP (C) No. 16742 of 2006, Sanjeev Gupta Vs Salini Gupta. Citation No. 2009

Section 125 CrPC: Supreme Court found the wife relying on a misleading proof but asked the husband to pay enhanced maintenance

Supreme Court has directed the husband to pay enhanced maintenance to wife even when it found that the proof relied upon by the wife was misleading.

A bench of Justice Chandrachud and Justice Banerjee has passed the order in the case titled as Monica Morton vs Durgesh Kumar Pal on 01.08.2019.

Wife filed appeal in the Supreme Court for enhanced maintenance drawing the attention of the Court to the fact that for August 2016, the pay slip of the respondent indicated a gross pay of Rs 1,11,133. After deductions of Rs 25,328, the take home pay was Rs 73,427. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the husband has submitted that the reliance which has been placed by the wife on the pay slip for August 2016 is misguided as the pay slip is not an accurate representation of the husbnad’s monthly salary and take-home pay for the month of August 2016 as it included arrears of Rs 50,733. 

Supreme Court gone through pay slips of previous and subsequent months which shown the susbmission of husband correct but despite that, it proceeded to enhance the maintenance.

Supremem Court observed and held "Though the respondent has three children from the earlier marriage they are now majors. We are of the considered view, having regard to the position of the parties and their circumstances in life, that a total award of maintenance of Rupees Twelve Thousand per month including the amount awarded under the Domestic Violence Act should be granted. Hence, we order and direct that, in addition to the amount which has been awarded by the Family Court, under Section 125 of the CrPC, the appellant would be entitled to a further sum of Rupees Five Thousand per month commencing from the date of the judgment of the Family Court".