Date of Judgement:
8th April 2019
Coram/judge:
The Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
The Hon’ble Justice Mr. Hemant Gupta
Parties to the Case:
Appellant - Ajay Kumar
Respondents–Lata @ Sharuti & Ors.
Legal Provisions
- Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005- lays down procedure for application to Magistrate to seek relief under the Act.
- Section 2(q) of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005- defines the word respondent for the purpose of the Act.
- Section 2(f) of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005- defines the expression ‘domestic relationship’
Overview
- The respondent was validly married to the petitioner and had two children.
- The first respondent filed a petition under Section 12 of the Act for the of seeking an award of maintenance. The complainant had contended that she, with her husband, resided at a house which was ancestral Hindu Joint Family Property on the ground floor of the residential home. The appellant and the deceased spouse of the first respondent jointly carried on a business of a grocery store at Panipat from which, each had an income of about Rs 30,000 per month.
- At the death of her husband, the first respondent was pregnant was not permitted to reside in her matrimonial home.
- The learned Trial Judge by an order granted monthly maintenance in the amount of Rs 4,000 to the first respondent and Rs 2,000 to the second respondent. The award of maintenance was directed against the appellant who had carried on the business together with the deceased spouse of the first respondent. The High Court affirmed such view and hence the present appeal was presented.
Arguments Advanced by The Appellant
- Leaned counsel for the appellant submitted that there was no basis under the provisions of the Act to hold the appellant liable. He was the brother of the deceased spouse of the first respondent. The sole basis for levy of such liability by the court was the joint business but there was no lawful basis that could direct the appellant to meet the award of maintenance.
Arguments Advanced by The Respondent
- Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents relied upon the complaint and submitted that at this stage, was no reason for the Court to interfere against the order.
Issue
Whether the order of maintenance from brother of deceased husband tenable in the present circumstances of the case?
Judgement Analysis
- The Court observed that Section 2(q) lays down that the expression “respondent” and it means any adult male person who was, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and against whom relief has been sought. The proviso indicated that both, an aggrieved wife or a female living in a relationship in the nature of marriage, may file a complaint against a relative of the husband or the male partner.
- Section 2(f) defines the expression ‘domestic relationship’ and lays down that it means a relationship where two persons live or have lived together at any point of time in a shared household when they were related by a lineage, marriage or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are members living together as a joint family.
- There were sufficient allegations in the complaint to sustain the order for the award of interim maintenance. It indicated that the case of the complainants was that the house where the first respondent and her spouse resided, belong to a joint family.
- The appellant and his brother (husband of respondent) carried on a joint business. The appellant resided in the same household.There was material justifying the issuance of a order in regard to the payment of maintenance.
- The Court disposed of the Appeal directing the appellant to pay arrears within a period of four months by equal monthly instalments.
Conclusion
The Honourable Apex Court construed the provisions related to interim maintenance as envisaged under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. While adjudicating on the merits of the complaint, the court upheld the order of the subordinate court to grant interim maintenance to the respondents.
Learn the practical aspects of Domestic Violence Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
