Important Judgement on Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act

Important Judgement on Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act

Important Judgement on Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act

  • Things to rely on while awarding interim maintenance, Important Judgement on Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. Alok Kumar Jain Vs. Purnima Jain-Delhi High Court- Decided on-17 April 2007-Equivalent Citation-2007(96) DRJ 115, AIR 2007 (NOC) 1654 (Del.).
  • Working wife is not entitled for maintenance. Anu Kaul vs Rajeev Kaul-Supreme Court-Decided on-23 March 2009- Equivalent Citation-(2009) 13 SCC209.
  • Liability of the respondent to pay maintenance -Maintenance to be paid till the till Hindu Marriage Act petition not terminated-Judgement against husband. Asha Devi vs Pominder Kumar Chhabra-Delhi High Court- Date of Decision-07 September 2006- Ex. F.A. No.2 of 2003.
  • Wife was qualified and working before marriage. She is capable of earning, hence maintenance declined. Shanthi vs Dr. H.K. Vasudev-Karnataka High Court- Date of Decision -22 August 2005- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2005 Kant417, ILR 2005 KAR 4981.
  • Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings not for those who have income sufficient for support and the necessary expenses. Harminder Kaur vs Gurtar Singh-Punjab-Haryana HC- Date of Decision-17 February 2011-CR No.7298 of 2009 (O&M).
  • Husband (unemployed) filed Restitution of Conjugal Rights, wife (working) filed divorce. Supreme Court transfers case at wife’s city on the condition that she will pay Maintenance for jobless Husband. Ines Miranda Vs Santosh K Swamy-Supreme Court- Date of Decision -14 December 2009- TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO.1268 OF 2009.
  • Sufficiently earning wife not eligible for maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. Kumaresan vs Aswathi-Madras High Court- Date of Decision -21 June 2002-Equivalent Citation-(2002) 2 MLJ 760.
  • Well qualified woman with past work experience can’t sit idle and claim maintenance. Mamta Jaiswal vs Rajesh Jaiswal-Madhya Pradesh High Court- Date of Decision – 24 March 2000- Equivalent Citation-II (2000) DMC170.
  • No Maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act for working Women. Manish Kumar vs Pratibha-Delhi High Court- Date of Decision -18 September 2008- CM (M) 949/2008.
  • Sufficiently Earning wife not eligible for maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy vs M. Devaki-Madras HC-Date of Decision-21 February 2003-Equivalent Citation-AIR 2003 Mad212, I (2003) DMC 799, (2003) 1 MLJ 752.
  • Maintenance to be calculated on the basis of actual earnings. Ritu Raj Kant vs Anita -Delhi High Court-Date of Decision-18 September 2008- Equivalent Citation-II-154 (2008) DLT 505
  • Qualified working wife not entitled for maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. Rupali Gupta vs Rajat Gupta-Delhi High Court-Date of Decision 05 September 2016- Equivalent Citation-2016 SCC OnLine Del 5009- Appeal in Matrimonial Case No. 143 of 2014.
  • Husband’s properties are irrelevant for interim maintenance. Unless he is drawing income from them. Wife is entitled for free legal aid. She should not saddle lower middle class husband with her Litigation expenses. Sangitaben Rasiklal Jaiswal vs Sanjaykumar Ratilal Jaiswal-Gujarat High Court-Date of Decision-09 December 1999, I (2001) DMC 19, (2000) 3 GLR 297.
  • Interim maintenance increase illegal as no income proof produced. Sanjeev Gupta vs. Shalini Gupta -Supreme Court-Date of Decision- 23 February 2009- CIVIL APPEAL NO.1163 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.16742 of 2006).
  • Moveable property cannot be termed as Income. Shakti Pershad vs. Ratna Pershad– Delhi High Court-Date of Decision-31 January 2003- Equivalent Citation-2003 IAD Delhi 697, 102 (2003) DLT 756, 2003 (66) DRJ 580, 2003 RLR 176.
  • Eleven points to consider for determination of interim maintenance. Sujit Kumar vs. Vandana-Delhi High Court-Date of Decision-08 September 2016. APP. (F.C.) 35/2015.
  • Wife alleged high income and property of husband but no proof was given by wife or husband. Sunder Singh vs Manna Sunder Singh-Punjab Haryana High Court-Date of Decision 28 July 1961- Equivalent Citation-AIR 1962 Punj 127.
  • Maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act to be decided on actual earning of husband and not on his parent’s properties. Sushila Devi vs. Shri Joginder Kumar-Delhi High Court- Date of Decision-02 July 2010-CM(M) No.1045/2008 & CM No.13003/2008.
  • Equally qualified and equally earning wife, no interim maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. Vijay Kumar Vs. Harsh Lata-Delhi High Court-Date of Decision-10 September 2008-Civil Miscellaneous (Main) No. 539 of 2008.
  • Wife not entitled to maintenance as Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was in husband’s favour- Manju Kamal Mehra vs. Kamal Pushkar Mehra-Bombay HC- Date of Decision-18 July 2009- FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.20 OF 2005.
  • Maintenance under Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act is applicable in Hindu Marriage Act Section 9 to 13 including section 11 & 12 -Judgement against Husband. Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga vs. Rameshwari Rameshchandra DagaSupreme Court– Date of Decision-13 December 2004- Equivalent Citation-AIR 2005 SC 422.

DISCLAIMER: The above judgments are posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printouts from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contacts your advocate.

Also Read:-Important Judgment on Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act.

Feel free to Share this

Bhupendra Sharma

"Bhupendra Sharma is a practicing lawyer at Rajasthan High Court who completed his graduation from the University of Rajasthan. He has pursued his LLM from Acharya Nagarjuna University. He is also a degree holder in Master of Education and Master of Business Administration."