The courts should perceive the couple’s final place earlier than they’ll grant upkeep: HC | Nagpur information

Nagpur: While the Nagpur Bank of the Bombay Supreme Court grants relief to a woman, it has ruled that the trial courts must assess a couple’s financial situation before they can mutually agree to provide alimony in divorce cases.
“In such cases, the party claiming the right to permanent maintenance must bring the other party’s financial status and other relevant circumstances to court. The court should be able to understand the financial situation and behavior of both parties in order to issue a maintenance order, “Justice Pushpa Ganediwala said.
The judge referred the case back to the court, saying that since the issue of child support had not been settled, both the husband and wife should appear before the judge on February 15. “The court decides the matter in accordance with itself with the law and without being influenced by any of the HC observations. ”
The Buldhana-based woman challenged the December 7, 2018, Khamgaon First Appeal Court ruling and rejected her application for alimony while ruling the divorce case by mutual agreement. That court upheld an earlier order from a civil judge in the higher division who dismissed her claim on December 20, 2017 while she was dissolving her marriage. She alleged that both courts failed to consider her prayer under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955.
According to her, she has not given up her right to maintenance. She pointed out that her husband earns Rs1 lakh per month and comes in over Rs20 lakh per month through his irrigated land.
Previously, the Khamgaon court granted her a provisional alimony of Rs 2,000 a month, which was suspended after her disrelated appeal was dismissed after her separation from her husband.
“It is very shocking that the woman’s prayer for permanent support was not considered to be lawful. The appeals court not only failed to read the bare text of the provision, but also relied on the authority of HCs before refusing their prayer. Given the circumstances, the judgment and the appeal court order must be overturned, ”said Judge Ganediwala.
The judge added that, according to that court, the “motion” referred to in Section 25 of the Act implies any written or oral application for prayer for alimony. “The type and form of application is irrelevant. The court cannot issue a maintenance order in a vacuum. It has to see the parameters as set in the deployment itself, ”she said.
* In cases of mutual divorce, the party requesting maintenance must inform the other side of the financial status
* It is very shocking that the woman’s prayer for alimony was not viewed in accordance with the law
* The appeals court did not read the bare text of the provision, nor did it rely on the authority of HCs, prior to declining the prayer
* The court cannot issue an order for permanent maintenance in a vacuum
* In the circumstances, the judgment and the appeal court order must be overturned
* The couple was due to appear in court on February 15 to decide on permanent alimony

Comments are closed.