Bench:
A Banerji
Issue:
How the discretion as to amount of maintenance should be exercised?
Facts:
- The petitioner is the wife of the respondent.
- The Plaintiff is an I.A.S Officer posted in Karnataka, but is a new entrant in the service and draws a salary of about Rs. 1100/- per month and has to incur heavy necessary expenses to the tune of Rs900/- per month considering the nature of service he is performing.
- The applicant is the daughter of a leading lawyer of Manipur and is not without support.
- A suit was filed by the husband for the dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of HMA, the wife made an application for maintenance, pendente lite and expenses for legal proceedings under Section 24 of the Act.
- The Court passed an order directed the husband to pay a sum of Rs.100/- per month as maintenance and Rs.100/- for expenses of legal proceedings.
- Aggrieved by above order the wife went to Allahabad High Court for revision stating that the earlier Court had committed material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction in passing the aforesaid order. It was urged that certain materials on record were not taken into consideration with the result that a completely enormous order was passed.
- The Judge very carefully explained the relevant sections under the Hindu Marriage Act and the need for adequate amount of maintenance by giving a few examples.
Judgment:
No particular amount for maintenance can be fixed by the Act as the amount may differ from case to case. The Courts have to fix the amount of maintenance considering all the circumstances of both the parties.The Judge was of the opinion that the order of the court below was cryptic and did not appear to be a speaking order. Considering the income of the parties and the circumstances the Judge thought that the wife was not much in need of a maintenance allowance and monthly allowance of Rs100/- was not inadequate. As the suit was pending in Allahabad and not in Manipur, the wife would have to come to Allahabad a number of times, thus would incur expenses and it would be fair if she was allowed a substantial increase in the amount of the expenses for legal proceedings. Thus, the monthly allowance was maintained at Rs.100/-, but the amount of expenses for legal proceedings was increased to Rs.600/- all the amount due was ordered to be deposited in the below Court within a month.
Relevant Paragraph:
It is well settled that a discretion must be exercised in a reasonable and proper manner, and not arbitrarily or capriciously. An order is a reasonable order which takes into consideration the various circumstances, for example, the means and the income of the parties, the nature of the litigation and allied circumstances. Section 24 uses the word "support" and does not use the word "standard" or "status". It is clear that the Court must keep in view that one cannot live like a Lord and the other like a maid nor can one live like a princess and the other like a servant. There must be some balance. It cannot be that while one lives in penury the other lives in grand style. The object of Section 24 is to provide the financially weaker party with some modicum of funds so that he or she, as the case may be, may contest the litigation. Every matrimonial suit is galling to the parties. It lays bare their personal problems. Their failure to adjust becomes a matter of discussion in Court, The sanctity of the matrimonial relationship is a confidential and private affair, but the same does not remain so once the matter comes to Court. Both the parties, howsoever high they may be, have to come to Court, lead evidence and contest the suit. It means that they have to come to Court a number of times. It also means expense. It is also well known that a suit does not conclude, even if it be a matrimonial suit early. It takes time. How is the party, the weaker party to maintain himself or herself, as the case may be, during the period the proceedings are pending. Justice demands that their equities be adjusted. It is, therefore, necessary for the Court to find out the respective income of the parties and the means they have. If a party has sufficient means, the Court may not allow her litigation expenses, but where it is shown that the party does not have an income or means the Court must order payment under both the heads.What should be the reasonable amount would be decided by the Court taking into consideration the various factors.
