Matter Of Maintenance U/S.24 Of Hindu Marriage Act Is Summary Enquiry & Not Full Fledged Trial: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court was considering a petition filed by the wife challenging the order passed by the Family Court.

Update: 2026-05-01 14:00 GMT

While remanding a matter of maintenance to the Family Court, the Karnataka High Court has held that such a matter under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955, is contemplated as a summary enquiry and not a full-fledged trial at length.

The High Court was considering a petition challenging the order passed by the Family Court dismissing an application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The Single Bench of Justice K. Manmadha Rao stated, “It is also pertinent to note that the Court’s discretion is judicial and not arbitrary in nature. Such judicial discretion must be exercised within the ambit of Section 24, considering the objective of the Act and adhering to the ideal principles of the matrimonial law.”

“Under Section 24 of the HMA, 1955, a matter is contemplated as a summary enquiry and not a fullfledged trial at length. If the court believes that the applicant is not likely to succeed in the dispute, then in such a case, the court cannot, solely on the basis of such grounds, refuse to grant interim maintenance and expense of proceedings under Section 24”, it added.

Advocate J.S. Halashetti represented the Petitioner while Advocate Sanketh represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The wife filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA Act), seeking interim maintenance of Rs 50,000 per month and litigation expenses of Rs.1,00,000. The husband filed his objections to the said application. The Family Court dismissed the application on the ground that the husband and wife lived together only about 6-7 months and hence, wife was not entitled to seek any interim maintenance and litigation expenses. The matter was posted for evidence.

Reasoning

Referring to section 24, the Bench explained that the primary objective of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses under this provision is to provide financial support to the claimant spouse, enabling them to maintain themselves and sustain the legal proceedings.

The Bench further explained that Section 24, does not lay down any rigid rule for deciding the quantum of interim maintenance. However, the quantum of such interim maintenance depends certain factors including the duration of the marriage, the means and conduct of the spouses, the ability of the spouse to earn, education and maintenance of children , other such reasonable needs of the claimant, as well as the educational qualifications of the claimant.

“It is to be noted that in matters of granting maintenance pendente lite, the Court exercises a wide discretion. However, this discretion is not to be exercised in an arbitrary manner. It should be within the ambit of Section 24 and guided by the ideal principles of matrimonial laws”, it added.

The Bench held that while considering the application, the Family Court did not follow the object and scope of the law concerning Section 24 and passed the impugned order without assigning proper reasons. The Bench thus remitted the matter back to the Family Court for fresh consideration.