Maintenance Under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act Payable Even During Stay of Divorce Proceedings: Allahabad High Court
|The Court held that a mere stay of divorce proceedings does not absolve a spouse of liability to pay maintenance pendente lite, as proceedings under the Act remain pending until formally concluded.
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a husband challenging recovery proceedings for maintenance awarded to his wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The Court held that the liability to pay subsists even when divorce proceedings are stayed, observing that “mere staying the proceedings of the matrimonial case will not amount that the matrimonial proceedings came to an end, absolving the petitioner of his liability to pay the maintenance amount from the date of stay of proceedings.”
The Court was hearing a petition against an order of the Family Court directing recovery of arrears of maintenance. The petitioner argued that since divorce proceedings had been stayed by the High Court on a transfer petition filed by the wife, the wife was not entitled to maintenance for that period.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Manish Kumar Nigam rejected this contention, highlighting: “Not only the party against whom a petition is instituted in a court may claim maintenance pendente lite and the expense of litigation but also a party who has instituted the litigation can also claim the cost of litigation and maintenance pendente lite in case, he or she does not possess independent income sufficient for his or her support (maintenance) during litigation and the expenses of the proceedings.”
Advocate Javed Habib appeared for the petitioner. The State was represented by the Standing Counsel.
Background
The petitioner had instituted a divorce petition in 2018. During its pendency, the respondent-wife moved an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. The Family Court dismissed her application, but the High Court, in appeal, set aside that order and awarded monthly maintenance to the wife and minor daughter, along with expenses of proceedings.
Subsequently, the respondent-wife filed a transfer petition before the High Court seeking transfer of the divorce case, and during the pendency of that petition, further proceedings in the divorce case were stayed. Relying on this stay, the petitioner contended that he was not liable to pay maintenance for the period the divorce proceedings remained suspended.
Court’s Observations
The Court analysed Section 24 of the Act, emphasising that it is intended to ensure that a financially weaker spouse is not handicapped during litigation. It explained that “the rich party cannot be allowed by law to have an upper hand simply by the strength of his purse. Money cannot be determinant of the merit of a case.”
The Court rejected the petitioner’s argument that maintenance was not payable during the stay of divorce proceedings. Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. v. Church of South India Trust Association (1992), the Bench clarified the distinction between quashing an order and staying its operation. It held that a stay does not terminate proceedings but only suspends their operation, and therefore, liability under Section 24 continues.
The Bench further held that even transfer proceedings fall within the scope of “proceedings under the Act,” citing judicial precedents. Hence, maintenance remains payable during the pendency of such proceedings as well.
Conclusion
Dismissing the petition, the Court held that no illegality had been committed by the Family Court in issuing recovery against the petitioner. It ruled that the liability to pay maintenance awarded under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act continues unless the order is set aside, modified, or varied by a superior court.
Cause Title: Ankit Suman v. State of U.P. and Another
Appearances:
Petitioner: Advocates Javed Habib, Mohammad Abdullah Rawaha
Respondents: C.S.C