The Delhi High Court has heldthat interim maintenance can be granted merely upon the satisfaction that the application by the wife prima facie discloses the commission of domestic violence under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act).

The Court set aside an Order passed by the Appellate Court under Section 29 of the DV Act. The Appellate Court’s order, which had modified an interim maintenance award by the Metropolitan Magistrate (MM), was deemed beyond its jurisdiction and inconsistent with the provisions of the DV Act.

A Single Bench of Justice Amit Mahajan held, “The only requirement for grant of interim maintenance as materialised under Section 23 of the DV Act is that the application by the wife has to prima facie disclose that she has suffered domestic violence at the hands of her spouse/ partner. While the veracity of the case of the wife would be tested during the course of trial, interim relief can be granted merely upon the satisfaction that the application by the wife prima facie disclosed the commission of domestic violence.

Advocate Satakshi Sood represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Sandeep Bhuraria appeared for the Respondents.

Brief Facts

The Wife filed an application under Section 12 of the DV Act, alleging domestic violence and seeking interim maintenance. The MM assessed the Husband’s income at based on bank statements, property records, and other financial documents. The MM accordingly directed the husband to pay interim maintenance to the wife and bear the college fees of their younger son.

The husband challenged the MM’s Order before the Appellate Court, which modified it by directing the wife to rent out her property to the husband. The Appellate Court noted that this arrangement would enable the husband to save money on rent, which he was otherwise paying for business premises, and pay the same to the wife as maintenance instead. Aggrieved by this modification, the wife approached the High Court.

Court’s Reasoning

The High Court held that the DV Act empowers the Magistrate to grant interim relief upon prima facie disclosure of domestic violence. The Court reiterated that such relief is meant to address immediate needs and cannot be made conditional upon the creation of a contractual relationship.

The aggrieved wife cannot thus be compelled to enter into a contractual arrangement whereby she is placed under an obligation to rent her property to the respondent, and thereby have her own independent source of income through rent. The learned Appellate Court, by compelling the petitioner to enter into an arrangement with the respondent to rent out her property to him, has thus travelled beyond the scope of Section 29 of the DV Act,” the Court remarked.

The Bench held that the Appellate Court cannot order conditional compensation to a wife by placing her under obligation to rent her property so she has an independent source of income through rent.

Consequently, the Court ordered, “In the light of the foregoing discussion, the impugned order is set aside. This Court deems it expedient to restore the appeal filed by the respondent and remand the matter to the learned Appellate Court for hearing the appeal afresh.

Cause Title: N v. S (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:13)

Click here to read/download the Judgment