Dear members,
Naresh (In search of job) 04 March 2010
Dear members,
Guest (Guest) 04 March 2010
I am talking about general law and not particularly keeping in view of the facts of your case. Sorry, if they will not suit your needs.
1. My first proposition is that a husband can be cruel as well as impotent. Hence, wife can seek the decree of nullity on the ground of impotency of the husband and also, alternatively, seek divorce on the ground of cruelty with specific instances of cruel acts in day to day life.
2. The wife has to prove that Impotence of the husband is only in respect of (qua) herself and not in respect of entire world. In other words, the husband may be cold against her and not against the other ladies.
3. It is very important. If Section 24 interim maintenance application lies in the petitions under void and voidable marriages? YES. Until the marriage is declared nullity, the petitioner is bound to pay maintenance to the wife. (Mangat Ram Vs. Anju Bala 2003 MLR 631 (Pb. & Har.)
kirtikumar ranjan (site supervisor) 05 March 2010
Dear Prabhakarji,
Can u please advice if wife geeting maintenace under section 24 and if husband files separte divorce case and wife files again for maintenece then which come in force. old or revised one ?
with regards
rajesh
Guest (Guest) 06 March 2010
Yes. She is entitled to file maintenance application u/s 24 in the divorce petition filed by you.
But the court while considering the maintenance application will see whether she has already been awarded maintenance under any other law (e.g. Section 125 cr.p.c. S.18 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, Domestic violence Act or in any other petition under Hindu Marriage Act). If the court wants to enhance the maintenance amount keeping in view of the changed circumstances and increased income of payer or increased expenditure of payee, it can increase, BUT WILL SET-OFF THE AMOUNT TO THE EARLIER AWARDED AMOUNT. THAT MEANS YOU HAVE TO PAY ONLY ONE MAINTENANCE, SETTING OFF THE AMOUNTS AWARDED IN OTHER CASES.
ad. creaminall (professional Advocate) 06 March 2010
mr. prabhakar is right.