- In Bhagyashri v Jagdish (2021), Justice Bharati Dangre, while rejecting the wife's plea under Section 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, upheld two civil court orders, which directed the wife, a teacher, to pay a maintenance amount of Rs. 3000 to her husband. The Hon'ble Bombay HC also directed the school principal to deduct a sum of Rs. 5000 from the plaintiff's salary for failing to pay the maintenance to her husband since August 2017. It was further observed that the ambit of Section 25 of the Act cannot be restricted by not applying to an indigent spouse, either husband or wife.
- In this instance, the petitioner filed for divorce based on cruelty in 2015, following which the defendant filed a follow-up plea demanding perpetual alimony of Rs 15,000 per month because he alleged to have no source of income while his wife worked as a teacher. The husband said that he put his goal aside and ran the house to help his wife achieve her degree and that the divorce had caused him a great deal of humiliation. He also mentioned his bad health and that he had no immovable property. On the other hand, the wife argued that she was responsible for their daughter's care and stated that her husband owned a grocery store, drove an auto-rickshaw, and leased the same for a living. After hearing both the parties, the Court ruled that the husband's petition under Section 24 of the Act, permitting the spouse to seek interim litigation fees, was maintainable. Therefore, the plaintiff was ordered to pay Rs. 3000 in maintenance until the permanent alimony case was resolved. Subsequently, the Court ordered the principal to deposit money with the Court to cover arrears on behalf of the plaintiff.
- Section 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 states that if either of the spouses has no independent income sufficient for their support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, the Court may, on the application of the needy spouse, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the costs of the proceedings.
- Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act's sole motive is to ensure that the husband and the wife are cared for following a divorce. As a result, clause 1 of the stated Section accomplishes this goal by providing support to the needy, whether it is the husband or the wife.
- In a similar case, Chand Dhawan v. Jawaharlal Dhawan (1993), the divorced wife was awarded Rs. 1,000 per month as maintenance, which was not accepted by the husband, causing the divorce procedures to be continued. Later, the wife filed an appeal with the District Judge in Amritsar for the maintenance amount, and she was awarded Rs. 6,000 in litigation fees and Rs. 2,000 in maintenance clause lite from the date of her application. The appellant further sought perpetual alimony and maintenance under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955. However, the learned justices agreed that petitions under sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act should be dismissed, and the parties were allowed to incur their own expenses.
- The Hon'ble Bombay HC, after hearing both the parties and referring to section 25 of the Act of 1955, ruled that as Section 25 has to be viewed as a provision for indigent spouses, the provisions will have to be broadly interpreted to salvage the remedial entailments. The Court also held that the civil judge had rightly evaluated the petition for interim maintenance under Section 24 and that the spouse was found to be entitled to temporary maintenance while the procedures under Section 25 were ongoing.
- Therefore, the appeal was dismissed by the Hon'ble Bombay HC.
"Loved reading this piece by Sharmishta?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
