Family Law/Matrimonial Cases
Working Mother Who Got Child Custody Claiming Financial Capability Can't Fasten Entire Maintenance Burden On Father: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has observed that a working mother who obtains the custody of her minor child by explicitly asserting her financial capability to maintain him/her cannot fasten the entire financial burden of the minor exclusively upon the father [2026 LiveLaw (AB) 418]. A bench of Justice Lakshmi Kant Shukla thus dismissed a criminal revision plea filed by a woman and her...
'Mere Failure To Produce Bills Or Receipts Does Not Disprove That In-Laws Were Given Stridhan During Marriage': Chhattisgarh High Court
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that the mere failure of a wife to produce bills or receipts of her Stridhan articles does not lead to the conclusion that such articles were not given at the time of marriage. The Court observed that where the wife specifically states that the receipts are in the possession of her in-laws and there is evidence regarding the entrustment of the...
Magistrate Can Invoke BNSS Search Provision To Recover Child Forcibly Taken Away By Father: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that a Magistrate can invoke the search provisions under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) to recover a child allegedly taken away by his father from the mother's custody by force.Upholding orders passed by a Magistrate in Malegaon directing the police to search the father's residence and subsequently restore the custody of the three-year-old child...
Wife Entitled To Interim Maintenance Under Hindu Marriage Act During Pendency Of Appeal Against Divorce Decree: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that a wife is entitled to continue receiving interim maintenance during the pendency of appeal against divorce decree under Hindu Marriage Act 1955, observing that an appeal is merely a continuation of the original matrimonial proceedings. [2026 LiveLaw (Del) 654]A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Renu Bhatnagar directed an Army officer to...
Hindu Succession Act | Class-I Heirs' Preferential Right Under Section 22 Extends To Agricultural Land : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 14) ruled that Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which grants Class-I heirs a preferential right to purchase property proposed to be transferred by another co-heir, applies equally to agricultural land. Dismissing an appeal challenging the applicability of Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act to agricultural land, a Bench of Justice Sanjay...
Family Court's Custody Order Based On Child Interaction That Never Took Place 'Unsustainable': Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court has set aside an interim custody order passed by a Family Court after finding that it was based on observations purportedly made during a personal interaction with the minor child, even though no such interaction had actually taken place. [2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 105]Holding that findings regarding a child's wishes, preference and demeanour cannot be founded on an event...
HAMA | Major Unmarried Daughter Need Not Show Disability To Claim Maintenance If Unable To Maintain Herself From Own Earnings: MP High Court
Upholding a family court order granting maintenance pendente lite of ₹2,000 to an unmarried adult daughter, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAM Act) clearly states that the daughter needs to show that she is unable to maintain herself with her earnings or other property and does not need to prove any disability....
Fixing Maintenance For Wife At 25% Of Husband's Net Income Not Mandatory; Court May Grant More Or Less: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the widely cited benchmark of awarding a wife 25% of a husband's net salary as maintenance is only a "broad guideline" and not mandatory. A bench of Justice Achal Sachdev clarified that courts have the discretion to award more or less, depending on the facts of each case. The Court also clarified that for the purpose of...