Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Bombay High Court passed an order in response to a petition filed by a Pune resident, who challenged February 7, 2019, order of a Family Court. The Family Court ordered him to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 15000 to his wife. The Bombay HC upheld the Family Court’s order to grant alimony to a woman who runs a beauty parlour. The Court said the earning potential or actual earning of that woman was not sufficient.
The Scenario of the Case
The 52 – year old man claimed his wife suffered from psychological illness. The marriage could not be consummated because of the illness. In April 2007, the couple applied for divorce in the Pune family court. The marriage was dissolved by mutual consent and a decree of divorce was issued. The businessman remarried after four years.
The woman applied for maintenance in 2016. She contended she had no source of earning a livelihood, and her husband didn’t provide her with any maintenance. The family court ordered man to pay her Rs. 15000. The Husband approached high Court and claimed his ex-wife is running a beauty parlour, so there is no need to provide anything. The material on record showed the woman was definitely running a beauty parlour.
Judgement and reasoning of the Court
The woman applied for maintenance in 2016. She contended she had no source of earning a livelihood, and her husband didn’t provide her with any maintenance. The family court ordered the man to pay her Rs. 15000. The Husband approached high Court and claimed his ex-wife is running a beauty parlour, so there is no need to provide anything. The material on record showed the woman was definitely running a beauty parlour.
The Court held that the object stated in the Section 125 of the CrPc cannot be ignored. It is a measure of social justice. The object is to prevent destitution and vagrancy. The statutory right of a wife cannot be permitted to be infringed, by setting up an agreement not to claim maintenance. That clause would be void under Section 23 of the Indian Contracts Act, being opposed to public policy.
86540
103860
630
114
59824