The Allahabad High Court has observed that at the time of divorce the Muslim husband is required to contemplate the future needs and make preparatory arrangements in advance for meeting those needs.

“The word “provision” used in Section 3 of the Muslim Act, 1986 indicates that something is provided in advance for meeting some needs. In other words, at the time of divorce the Muslim husband is required to contemplate the future needs and make preparatory arrangements in advance for meeting those needs.”, the bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi observed.

The Court noted that under Section 3(3) of the Muslim Act, 1986, the former husband of the divorcee can be directed to pay such maintenance as deemed fit having regard to needs of the divorced woman.

“Under Section 3(3) of the Muslim Act, 1986, an order can be passed directing the former husband of the divorcee to pay to her such reasonable and fair provision and maintenance as deemed fit and proper having regard to needs of the divorced woman, her standard of life enjoyed by her during her marriage and means of her former husband.”, the Court observed.

The Court was dealing with an appeal challenging the Judgment directing the respondent-husband to pay to the applicant-appellant Rs.1001/- as amount of Mahr and another sum of Rs.1500/- per month for the period of iddat.

Advocates Prakhar Saran Srivastava and Pradeep Kumar Rai appeared for the appellant whereas Advocates Arvind Srivastava and Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui appeared for Respondent.

The counsel for the applicant/appellant submitted that the appellant is entitled for maintenance from the opposite party/respondent for future period beyond the period of Iddat in terms of Section 3 of the Muslim Act, 1986.

The Court held that the Family Court had committed a manifest error of law by holding that the applicant-appellant is entitled for maintenance only for the period of iddat.

The Court noted that under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Act, 1986, a divorcee can file an application before a Magistrate if her former husband has not paid to her a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance or mahr due to her or has not delivered the properties given to her before or at the time of her marriage.

The Court further noted that the Family Court has not properly considered the various evidences on record regarding the properties given to the applicant-appellant before or at the time of marriage or after marriage by her relatives or friends or the husband or relatives or the husband or his friends.

Thus the Court set aside the impugned judgment and remitted the matter back to the competent court to determine the amount of maintenance and return of properties to the applicant-appellant by the respondent husband.

Cause Title- Zahid Khatoon v. Nurul Haque Khan

Click here to read/download Order