In Multiple Matrimonial Proceedings, Plea Claiming Higher/ Highest Maintenance Must Be Decided First: Allahabad High Court

Referring to the Supreme Court's decision on multiple deductions towards maintenance amount, the Allahabad High Court has said that in matrimonial disputes if there are multiplicity of maintenance proceedings under different legislations, the plea claiming the highest maintenance must be decided first by the concerned court. The observation came in an army personnel's plea who claimed that though money was being directly deducted towards maintenance from his salary under an army order, however the wife had gone on to again seek maintenance under two separate proceedings–one under the Hindu Marriage Act and the other under the Domestic Violence Act. As this was allowed by the family court through two different orders, the man approached the high court. Supreme Court's firm rule against multiple deductions towards interim/final maintenanceReferring to the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs Neha & Anr.(2021), a division bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh in its order said that the judgment clearly lays down a "firm rule against multiple deductions or recoveries, towards interim/final maintenance allowance".It said, "Without a doubt, award of maintenance allowance, made under one law (here Service law), would always satisfy the recovery of maintenance allowance for an equal or lesser amount, directed under any order passed by any Court or authority, under any other statutory law (here Hindu Marriage Act, 1955). Thus, no (further) recovery may be made pursuant to any order/s providing for equal or less monthly interim/final maintenance allowance, so long as an equal or higher sum of maintenance allowance has been or is being paid under another order providing for equal or higher interim/final maintenance allowance"."To that extent, recoveries arising under any other order/s (providing for equal or lesser interim/final maintenance allowance), would remain subject to the payment/recovery already made under the order providing for equal or higher interim/final maintenance allowance, irrespective of the statutory law under which that provision for higher maintenance allowance may be made. In such cases the payer spouse – often the husband, is required to produce before the Court or authority seeking recovery of such amount - proof of deposit/deduction/payment/recovery made, of equal or higher interim/final maintenance allowance. On that proof arising, the Court/authority concerned shall not pursue (further), separate recovery of that equal or less amount of interim/final maintenance allowance," the high court added. Courts must be pragmatic, decide highest/higher maintenance claim firstWith respect to multiple orders arising from more than one application filed by a claimant under different enactments, the bench said that the respective Courts must act with "pragmatism". It said that in such a situation the application claiming the highest/higher maintenance must be decided first. It was held that though different applications for the same time period are permissible, the Court ought to decide the higher/ highest demand and dispose of the rest of the applications accordingly.The Court held that recovery under the equal/lessor order for maintenance can only be made when the other side has failed to pay the equal or higher maintenance under the earlier award. It was held that the fact that higher amount has been paid/ deducted in earlier proceedings though under service law is a valid ground for defence.“Where the subsequent order may provide for a equal or higher amount of maintenance allowance than awarded under earlier order/s (under any law), the actual amount to be paid/recovered under that later order would depend on the status of payment/recovery of the equal or lesser amounts (under the earlier order/s). Similarly, where in a case equal or less amount of maintenance allowance awarded under the later order gets paid/recovered first i.e. before recovery being made under the earlier order, the payer spouse would be entitled to claim benefit of that recovery in the recovery proceedings under the earlier order/s,” the bench said. Effort be made to award wholesome, adequate and reasonable maintenanceThe Court held that applying the law laid down in Rajnesh Vs. Neha & Anr., the Court hearing the maintenance application must make an effort to award a "wholesome, adequate and reasonable" interim/ final maintenance allowance. It was held that once just amount is awarded to the claiming spouse, it raises the chances of peaceful settlement of the matrimonial discord between the parties raises, thereby saving Court's precious time.Observing that often estranged spouse is a homemaker dependent on the other spouse, the Court observed:“In that fragile state, the financially vulnerable spouse experiences inequality, oppression and humiliation besides the hard pinch of financial subjugation. Correspondingly, in such situations, the other spouse (mostly male) asserts his...

In Multiple Matrimonial Proceedings, Plea Claiming Higher/ Highest Maintenance Must Be Decided First: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

In Multiple Matrimonial Proceedings, Plea Claiming Higher/ Highest Maintenance Must Be Decided First: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers