The Karnataka High Court has directed trial courts to adhere to a timetable when hearing applications filed by women seeking maintenance from their respective husbands under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna was hearing a petition filed by Pratibha Singh against her husband, Vineet Kumar.
The court noted that the wife had submitted an application on June 2, 2020, in accordance with Section 24 of the Act. In addition to the assets and liabilities statement, the husband submitted his objections on November 28, 2021, which is more than 19 months after the application was submitted. The court then decides on the application on August 26, 2022, and orders that payment be made starting from that day. As a result, 30 months after the application was filed, the court has decided the relevant matter.
The bench stated that, “This delay in considering those applications for maintenance would defeat the very soul of the provision which is to give succour to the wife who leaves or is made to leave the matrimonial house on myriad circumstances. Merely, because the provision directs disposal of the application, as far as possible within 60 days, it cannot be stretched to an extent by the Courts to an extent that the wife would not see the amount of maintenance for ages.”
It further stated that “The concerned Court is to stick to a timeframe for disposition of the applications seeking maintenance from the husband as requested by the wife, so that the right to claim maintenance should not become illusory.”
Following this, the bench issued the following timeline:
a. The application notice will be given right away. In the eyes of the law, service provided via email or WhatsApp is likewise considered to be genuine service.
b. The relevant Court must provide the husband two months to file his objections to the wife’s application for interim maintenance made pursuant to Section 24 of the Act.
c. The same two months should be allowed to the wife to submit her asset and liability statements. d. The concerned Court shall consider the parties’ arguments, hear them, and issue appropriate orders on the assets and liabilities thus filed by the wife within four months, if not sooner.
d. Therefore, the outer limit to decide any application seeking interim maintenance is six months from the date of its filing.
e. The concerned Court should refrain from giving both the husband and wife needless adjournments in order to meet this deadline.
f. The Court would be free to issue the necessary orders in accordance with the legislation if the husband or wife refused to cooperate with the conclusion of the proceedings regarding the application for interim maintenance.
g. Any delay longer than six months shall only occur for legitimate reasons that are specified in writing in the final order.
The bench opined, “It is made clear that the relevant Courts shall follow the aforesaid timeframe, as the wife should not be made to wait for years on end to get a specific amount of maintenance from the husband’s hands. The wife would frequently be forced into poverty the moment she left the marital home for a variety of reasons. The aforementioned timeframe should be scrupulously adhered to prevent the wife from being pushed to such impecuniosities.
