[Supreme Court news] | [Marriage, Alimony, Hindu Marriage Act]

Reading time: 03 minutes

Summary

The Supreme Court ordered that the case be referred to the Chief Justice of India to constitute a three-judge bench as there were conflicting judgments by the two-judge bench.

The Supreme Court has clarified a question as to whether maintenance can be granted even if the marriage has been declared annulled.

A bench comprising Vikram Nath and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale directed that the matter be referred to the Chief Justice of India for directions so that it could be placed before a three-judge bench.

In one case, counsel for the parties before the Bar Council submitted that the matter should be examined by a three-judge bench as there were conflicting views on the applicability of Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which provide for the award of maintenance in the case of an annulled marriage.

The court also listed the judgments in favour of award of maintenance: Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav Vs. Anantrao Shivram Adhav & Another (1988), Abbayolla Reddy Vs. Padmamma (1999), Navdeep Kaur Vs. Dilraj Singh (2003), Bhausaheb @ Sandhu S/o Raguji Magar Vs. Leelabai sans Bhausaheb Magar (2004), Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya Vs. State of Gujarat and Others (2005).

The judgments against the grant of maintenance are Chand Dhawan Vs. Jawaharlal Dhawan (1993) and Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga Vs. Rameshwari Rameshchandra Daga (2005).

Advocates Rajesh Aggarwal and others appeared for the appellant Sukhdev Singh in the instant case, while senior advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani and advocate Naresh Kumar represented the respondent Sukhbir Kaur.