Whether Wife Is Staying Away From Husband Without Any Justifiable Reason Doesn’t Require Adjudication For Granting Pendente Lite Maintenance: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court has held that whether a wife is staying away from the husband without any justifiable reason or not does not require adjudication for granting pendente lite maintenance.
The Court dismissed the Husband’s appeal against the Family Court’s Order granting pendent-lite maintenance to the Wife. The Family Court had allowed the Wife’s application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) seeking pendent-lite maintenance after the Husband had filed for divorce under Section 13 of the HMA.
A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Om Prakash Shukla held, “There is no material brought on record to point out that respondent wife has no independent source of income for her sustenance, whereas it has come on record that the Appellant- husband is a colonel in the Indian Army and draws a handsome salary. In absence of any such material, the discretion which has been exercised by the learned family court by awarding Rs.50,000/- to the Respondent/Wife for filing of reply and an amount of Rs.10,000/- as well as Rs.500/- per hearing, to be paid within 30 days from the date of order by the appellant, cannot be interfered in the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court unless perversity is explained on the face of the record. In the opinion of this Court since there is no perversity in the impugned order, it does not call for any interference.”
Advocate Prachish Pandey appeared for the Appellant.
Assailing the Family Court’s Order, the Husband submitted that the Family Court did not consider that the Wife was living separately from him without any plausible justification. Importantly, it was argued that the Husband was already directed to pay monthly maintenance to his family.
The High Court clarified that the Family Court had granted only the expenses that the wife was going to make in the divorce suit, therefore, if any amount was being paid for the maintenance of the children, the same would not in any manner impact the expenses that the wife was required to make in the suit before the Family Court.
“It is no longer res Integra that a husband's obligation to maintain his wife arises on marriage, whereas such an obligation towards the children arises on their birth. These obligations are imposed on him by operation of law. It is also a moral obligation imposed upon him and it would rather be 'immoral' and 'illegal' to deny them maintenance. In our view, it is a sacred duty of an ably bodied husband or father, as the case may be, towards his wife and children to maintain in all circumstances,” the Court remarked.
The Lucknow Bench observed, “In the instant case, without there being any adjudication on the aspect as to whether the wife is staying away from the husband without any justifiable reason or not, the paramount interest of the wife is to be adjudged on the parameters given in Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, namely, whether she has independent and sufficient income for her up keep or not.”
“The object of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriages Act in providing maintenance to a party in matrimonial proceedings is obviously to provide financial assistance to the spouse to maintain herself or himself during the pendency of the proceedings and also to have sufficient funds to carry on the litigation so that the spouse does not unduly suffer in the conduct of the case for want of funds,” the Court explained.
Consequently, the Court held, “Thus, in view of above, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order. For all the aforesaid reason, we do not find the present Appeal to be a fit case for interference.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: A v. N (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:74139-DB)
