Karnataka HC Attaches Husband’s Property To Secure Maintenance To Wife And Differently Abled Son

The Division Bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde observed, “Under Section 39 of the Transfer of Property Act, of 1882, the arrears of maintenance can be a charge on the property. Since the 1st defendant is not diligent in discharging his liability under the decree, this Court is of the view that a charge must be created over the property of the 1st defendant to secure the payment of maintenance to the plaintiffs. The charge created over the property shall have to be recorded in all the property records standing in the name of the 1st defendant.”

Advocate Sameer SN for the Appellants.

The wife alleged that she was subjected to cruelty in the marriage and therefore, compelled to file a suit for maintenance in the year 2000, which was decreed in her favour directing monthly maintenance of Rupees Two Thousand to her and Rupees One Thousand to the Appellant-son, who is differently abled and is under the care of the Appellant-wife. She filed a subsequent suit in 2014, in view of the escalation in cost of living, seeking maintenance of Rupees Five Thousand. The Family Court decreed the suit in part and awarded maintenance of Rs.3,000/- each in favour of the plaintiffs.

The Family Court directed the husband to pay maintenance of the aforesaid sum from the date of disposal of the pending divorce petition. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree to the extent of disallowing the Wife's claim, the present appeal was filed. The wife also filed an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for attachment of property standing in the name of the Husband

The Court also held, “It is also relevant to note that the Family Court has not granted the monthly maintenance from the date of the suit. However, the decree directs payment of monthly maintenance from the date of the decree in M.C.No.3261/2013. The wife and the differently abled son’s right to claim maintenance has nothing to do with the divorce petition filed by the wife. Thus, this Court does not find any justification in the decree which says 1st defendant is liable to pay maintenance only from the date of disposal of the petition seeking divorce and denying the maintenance from the date of the suit. Therefore, each of the plaintiffs is entitled to monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of the suit.”

Accordingly, the Court allowed the Appeal and ordered that the property standing in the name of the Respondent-husband shall carry the charge of maintenance ordered.

Cause Title: Smt Uma and Anr v. Banashankar and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC:14422-DB)

Appearances:

Appellants: Advocate Sameer S N

Click here to read/download the Judgment