Resjudicata in crpc 125 ?

What were the circumstances that led to her refusal for interim maintanence .you would have to contest the case in a similar manner for crpc 125 .Next she will try her luck under Sec HMA 25 if she fails in crpc 125 :-) .By the way  Is she a working women.

Res Judicata never applies in cases of orders that are based on circumstances that are prone to change. Maintenance/Child Custody orders are never final and do not hold good as res judicata, on a change of circumstances - these orders can be varied end number of times. However if the circumstances are static or have not changed - then the court would not grant her maintenance after fresh inquiry and perusal of circumstances.

Bharat Chugh - Advocate Supreme Court of India

Blog : www.advocatebharatchugh.wordpress.com, www.bharatchugh.wordpress.com

Stay Connected on Facebook ! www.facebook.com/advocatebharatchughonthelawsofindia

Thanks a lot Stanely and Adv Bharat Chugh,

As i said, in the crpc 125 application, nothing has been mentioned about changed circumstances , It is a carbon copy of the DV case which was filed last year. The only thing that is mentioned is that DV case is already filed .I found two citation involving similar situtaion. One is Renu Mittal Vs Anil Mittal from Delhi High Court which says that juridiction for granting maintenace under crpc 125 and dometic violence is parallel.Other citation is from ravindra karmakar Vs Shaila karmacar case from Bombay High Court which says that two simultaneous proceedings in two different courts could not be allowed. Please let me know if these citations can be useful in my case. Thanks once again for your valuable suggestions and advices

Its a tricky situtation . 

1. The first judgement states that interim maintanence has been awarded and hence multiple maintanence cannot be awarded but in your case interim maintanence has been denied for which we are not aware on what basis it has been denied . In the above post i have asked you if your wife is a working women for which you have not yet responded . 

2. In a DV case the grounds for awarding interim maintanence is governed under the same rules of CRPC 125 .

3. Your wife's counsel  would now try to project  that she has lost her job etc and under change of circumstances  her counsel may plead for interim maintanence for which your counsel would have to oppose the same on the grounds that she is qualified and was a working women in the past which is my view . 

Anyway you have to contest the case 

Thanks a lot for your reply Stanely.

My wife is not a working woman but well qualified.I also lost my job and I am still jobless.There is no change in the situation as of now. It's just that we r expecting result of the DV case by the end of this month.She has already moved to sessions court for interim maintenance and the same case is still going on.

Here are the grounds on which she was denied interim mainetance:

1..She had alleaged that she was not given medical treatment during pregnancy ans she is staying at her parent's house after pregnacy .I submitted documents of medical treatment that i did during her pregnancy, also submitted proofs of medical care taken by me for the child at the place wheer we lived.After seeing thse documenst her lawyer alleged that those documents are for abortion of the child. The documents are from the first month of pregnancy till the 9th month and contain all tests and precirbtions for welfare of the mother and child and not for abortion.

2. She also alleaged that she was never allowed to go  outside the house during her stay at her matrimonial house, I submitted documents from educational institutes where  she used to attend educational  courses which she completed successfully while we were living together.

3. She allegaed her that I hav tried to kill her. How/when/when is not mentioned.No police complain about it

4. In her Affidavit she mentioned that her medical condition is so critical that she can't do anything  which she cud not prove at all , not a single document abt her ill health till date.

5. She lied abot her stay at her parent's house. She said that she is staying thr after pregnacy and did no returm to her matrimonial house after that. Based on the medical tretment documents of my child, this alleagtion was prooved false.This was mentioned in the order given by Hon Judge.

As I said earlier. there is no change of circumstances as of now.In the crpc 125 case, she has made same alleagations and is silent about her case which is running in sessions court for inetrim maintenace.