Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Case law - Raja Gopalan vs Rajamma.
Bench:
C Vaidialingam.
Facts:
- The applicant spouse and the respondent wife got a decree for judicial separation under section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, by a decree dated 12-2-1960 from District Court, Ernakulam.
- The judicial seperation was acquired by spouse on the ground of unchastity on part of the respondent.
- The wife claimed that she is entitled to be paid alimony under section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- The District court passed an order, directing the petitioner to pay "maintenance" or what is called, in the orders, as starving allowance, to the respondent at Rs. 12.50 per month.
- In this case, the petitioner challenges this order of the courtroom.
Issues:
Whether an unchaste spouse had an absolute right to a starving allowance for her maintenance?
Contentions of the Appellant:
- The petitioner stated that he has obtained the decree of judicial separation by establishing unchastity on the part of the respondent, thus the latter has no right at all to be awarded any maintenance whatsoever, under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- The petitioner alleged that the respondent, has not resumed cohabitation with the petitioner for a space of 2 year, and that this is the required time period to claim for dissolution of the marriage by a decree for divorce, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Contentions of the Respondent:
- The respondent admitted the fact that there is a decree for judicial separation; but nevertheless stated that she is still prepared to go and live with the petitioner.
- She also claimed that she is entitled to be paid alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- The respondent claimed alimony at the rate of Rs. 45/- per month on the ground that she is accustomed to a decent way of life and on the basis that the petitioner is getting not less than Rs. 100 as monthly income.
Background:
An order of judicial separation was passed by the honorable District Court, Ernakulam on 12-2-1960.
Judgment:
- If a decree for judicial separation has been passed, in favour of the husband on the basis of a finding recorded as against a wife under Section 10(1)(f) of the the Hindu Marriage Act, the wife will not be entitled to claim any maintenance under Section 25(1).
- Section 25 (1) is a general provision dealing with provision being made for permanent alimony and maintenance at the time of passing a decree.
- Therefore, according to the court, the respondent in this case, was not entitled to make any claim for permanent alimony and maintenance under Section 25(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Thus the result is, the orders of both the courts will stand set aside to the extent to which they have awarded maintenance to the respondent, under Section 25 (1). However, the decree for divorce passed by both the courts will stand.
