Help required on interim maintenance
Arvind Singh Chauhan
(Querist) 09 October 2012
This query is : Resolved
Sir,
It has been a trend in 125 Cr.P.C. That court awards interim maintenance to wife, considering her helplessness, saying that all other facts would be considered on merit after evidence. Court generally think that it is it's bounden duty to award interim to wife.
In my case OP says she is not his wife his wife is DDDDDD. Petitioner unnecessarily blackmailing him and compelling him for marriage. Petitioner,s husband is alive and she has already grabbed money from him also. My client has all proofs of his real marriage.
But petitioner has not put a single proof that she is OP's wife. She only wrote single word "that she is his wife and he tortured her".
Sir I have to say at there must be some prima facie proof of marriage in file to award interim maintenance otherwise it would be encouragement to such type of greedy ladies.
Please give your opinion and refer if there is any citation,On this point.
Bhawani Mahapatra
(Expert) 09 October 2012
Dear Arvind
I am agree with your concern. As you told, in most of case u/s 125 Cr.P.C, Magistrates usually pass an award of interim maintenance first before properly examining the prima facie of the case.
They are compelled to do so, as in several cases, the HCs and Supreme Court of India also have opnied like " for the proceeding u/s-125Cr.P.C....strict proof of marriage is not necessary".
This is probably an encouragement for the ladies who wants to extort some money from their partners.
It has been seen in some cases, the working ladies also file petition u/s 125 Cr. P.C and for few months they quit their job in order to bring the case to the court.
Adv.R.P.Chugh
(Expert) 09 October 2012
I share the concern raised by my learned brothers. Supreme Court has laid down categorically that strict proof/de jure is not required for succeeding in a cause of maintenance. De facto marriage is enough to be proved. In this regard one can see Pyla Mutyalamma v. Pyla Suli (2011 SC). This is just also in some cases as if a women who has lived with a man for years should not be rendered destitute. In another case of extortion and unwarranted demand - another supreme court judgment, citation I don't remember readily - perhaps something like Savita Soma bhai Bhatia (2005) SC - a wife out of void marriage was held not to be 'wife' within the meaning of S.125 and hence not entitled.
Adv.R.P.Chugh
(Expert) 09 October 2012
As regards Working women increasingly seeking maintenance - this is a part of larger misuse of the law. There are many a judgments which say maintenance is not a bounty or a dole to be awarded to somebody for his laziness, nobody can be allowed to live as a parasite if otherwise in a position to earn. Women who leave job to burden the husband with financial implication of maintenance are not entitled.
