Meghalaya High Court Sets Aside Trial Court's Maintenance Order Due To Non-Disclosure Of Assets By Parties, Directs Reconsideration

The Meghalaya High Court recently set aside a maintenance order passed by a Trial Court under Section 125 of CrPC on the ground that no affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities were filed by both parties. The single judge bench of Justice B. Bhattacharjee observed: “Since, it is not disputed in the present case that the impugned order dated 16-02-2024 was passed without there being any affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities by the parties, the same is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration after compliance of legal requirement mandated by the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Rajnesh (supra) and Aditi Alias Mithi (supra) by the parties.” The Court was hearing an application under Section 397 of CrPC wherein the impugned order dated February 16, 2024 was passed by Trial Court by which the petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs.18,000/- per month to the respondent and her children as maintenance allowance under Section 125 of CrPC. The Counsel appearing for the petitioner challenged the impugned order on the ground of non-filing of affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities by the parties as mandated by the direction of the Supreme Court in terms of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324 and Aditi Alias Mithi v. Jitesh Sharma (2023) SCC OnLine SC 1451. The Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the opposite party belongs to the economically weaker section and is living below the poverty line and as per the decisions of the Apex Court in Rajnesh (supra) and Aditi Alias Mithi (supra), there is no requirement of filing of any such disclosure affidavit by the opposite party. The Court noted that from the materials on record, it is evident that no affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities were filed by both the parties in terms of the judgments of the Apex Court. “The mandate of law laid down in Aditi Alias Mithi (supra) case makes it clear that no Court can pass an order of maintenance, either interim or final, without there being any affidavit on record filed by the parties. Moreover, there is also no order by the Trial Court dispensing with the requirement of filing of affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities by the opposite party herein on the ground that the opposite party belong to the economically weaker sections or is living below the poverty line,” the Court said. Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration after compliance of legal requirement mandated by the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Rajnesh (supra) and Aditi Alias Mithi (supra) by the parties. Case Title: Shri Goreth N. Marak v. Smti Wansayi D Shira Case No.: Crl. Rev. P. No. 1 of 2024Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Megh) 1 Click Here To Read/Download The Order

Meghalaya High Court Sets Aside Trial Court's Maintenance Order Due To Non-Disclosure Of Assets By Parties, Directs Reconsideration

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Meghalaya High Court Sets Aside Trial Court's Maintenance Order Due To Non-Disclosure Of Assets By Parties, Directs Reconsideration

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers