Scribd
Upload
68 views2 pages

AIR1999SC536

This case involved a dispute over whether maintenance amounts awarded under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code could be adjusted against interim alimony awarded in related matrimonial proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in ruling that such an adjustment was not allowed, as the Code Section 125 maintenance was adjustable against the alimony amount. However, to balance the claims of both parties, the Court directed the husband to pay the wife a consolidated sum of Rs. 1,000 per month towards both, starting from the initial Code Section 125 maintenance order date. Arrears were to be paid within 8 weeks. The order was subject to further orders in the final matrimonial proceedings disposal.

Uploaded by

Lokpal Mahajan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
68 views2 pages

AIR1999SC536

This case involved a dispute over whether maintenance amounts awarded under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code could be adjusted against interim alimony awarded in related matrimonial proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in ruling that such an adjustment was not allowed, as the Code Section 125 maintenance was adjustable against the alimony amount. However, to balance the claims of both parties, the Court directed the husband to pay the wife a consolidated sum of Rs. 1,000 per month towards both, starting from the initial Code Section 125 maintenance order date. Arrears were to be paid within 8 weeks. The order was subject to further orders in the final matrimonial proceedings disposal.

Uploaded by

Lokpal Mahajan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

8/21/23, 9:59 AM about:blank

This Product Licensed To : Adv. Vijay P. Mahajan

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


Sudeep Chaudhary vs Radha Chaudhary

Criminal Appeal No 111 of 1997 On 31 January 1997

Hon'ble Judges: S. P. Bharucha, Faizan Uddin

Case Type: Criminal Appeal

Final Decision: Appeal disposed

Advocates:

Citations:
1997 0 CJ(SC) 1397,1997 11 SCC 286,1998 0 AIR(SCW) 3845,1998 0 CriLR 262,1998 0 SCC(Cri) 160,1998 9 JT 473,1998 9
JT 474,1999 0 AIR(SC) 536,1999 0 CriLJ 466,1999 0 KHC 1592,1999 2 KCCR 890,1999 2 MarriLJ 9,1999 5 BCR 813,1999 5
BCR(Cri) 813

ACTS REFERRED:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 125
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 24

(A) Criminal Law - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 125 - Order for maintenance of
wives, children and parents(B) Family Law - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 24 - Maintenance
pendente lite and expenses of proceedings font-size: 14px;">Citations: 1997 0 CJ(SC) 1397,1997
11 SCC 286,1998 0 AIR(SCW) 3845,1998 0 CriLR 262,1998 0 SCC(Cri) 160,1998 9 JT 473,1998 9 JT
474,1999 0 AIR(SC) 536,1999 0 CriLJ 466,1999 0 KHC 1592,1999 2 KCCR 890,1999 2 MarriLJ 9,1999
5 BCR 813,1999 5 BCR(Cri) 813
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, S.24 Criminal Penal Code, S.125 The Respondent (wife) After Failing To Receive The
Maintenance As Well Alimony Amount As Directed By Court - Started Recovery Suit - Appellant Contended
Adjustment Of Maintenance Amount To Alimony - High Court Rejected - The Court Allowed The Adjustment And
Directions.hindu Marriage Act, 1955 S.24, Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 S.125, imppara 1

Judgement Text

about:blank 1/2
8/21/23, 9:59 AM about:blank

BHARUCHA, J.

1. Special leave granted.

2. The respondent-wife has been served by substituted service but does not appear.

3. The appellant-husband and the respondent-wife are estranged. The wife filed an application under Section 125
of the Criminal Procedure Code for maintenance which was awarded at the rate of Rs. 350/- p.m. with effect
from 3rd July, 1990, and was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 500/- p.m.

4. In proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act the wife sought alimony. It was granted at the rate of Rs. 600/-
p.m. on 11th August, 1987, and the amount thereof was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 800/- p.m.

5. Since the husband failed to pay the amount of maintenance as aforesaid, the wife started recovery
proceedings. The husband contended that the maintenance amounts should be adjusted against the interim
alimony and the Magistrate before whom the recovery proceedings were pending upheld the contention. The
High Court, in the order which is under appeal, held that the Magistrate was in error in directing adjustment of
the maintenance amount awarded under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C. against the amount awarded under Section
24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

6. We are of the view that the High Court was in error. The amount awarded under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C.
for maintenance was adjustable against the amount awarded in the matrimonial proceedings and was not to be
given over and above the same. In the absence of the wife, we are, however, not inclined to go into any detailed
discussion of the law.

7. At the same time, we feel that the claims of the husband and the wife are to be balanced. We, therefore, direct
that the husband shall pay to the wife towards maintenance (which now comprehends both the amount awarded
under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C. and the amount awarded in the matrimonial proceedings) the sum of Rs.
1,000/- p.m. commencing from 3rd July, 1990. The arrears, if any, shall be paid within 8 weeks.

8. This order will be subject to such orders as may be passed at the stage of final disposal of the matrimonial
proceedings.

9. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

10. No order as to costs.

Order accordingly.

about:blank 2/2

You might also like