Enforcement Of Maintenance Orders- Residence Of Husband Not Material: Delhi HC

• The Delhi HC has observed in the case of Asha Devi and Ors. vs. Muneshwar Singh has observed that enforcement of the order of maintenance, as contemplated under section 128 of CrPC may be executed in any place that the husband may be. The section specifically states “where the person against whom it is made may be”and does not mention his residence or where his permanent property is situate.
• In the instant case, the wife and husband has started living separately in 2000. In a maintenance petition by the wife, the trial court ordered the payment of Rs.1000 to the wife and Rs.500 each to the children.
• When she filed an application for execution, the Trial court, noting that the husband resides in Bihar, ordered the wife to file the execution petition in the Courts of Bihar. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal was preferred to the HC.
• The Hon’ble HC, expressing their dismay, observed-

“It is unfortunate that a woman and her children have to run pillar to post to avail their rights to which they are entitled under the law of the country. Material fact, hence, would be the presence of the person at the preferred jurisdiction at the time of application for maintenance”.

• It was submitted by the appellants that under CrPC, the wife ‘may’ proceed for execution at the permanent residence of the husband, ‘may’ being the operative word, as it was an option and not an obligation.
• It was further observed by the Court that even though the wife could have moved the maintenance application in Bihar where the husband had his permanent residence, the right to move the Courts in Delhi also subsists.
• Thus, the Hon’ble Court, while allowing the petition. Set aside the order of the Trial Court and remanding the proceedings back to the Family Court, Dwarka, New Delhi, so that the execution proceedings could commence.

And now, a question for our aspirants-

In which year, the upper limit of maintenance that could be allotted was removed?