Family Courts are entitled to dismiss a plea for divorce if the petitioner does not comply with an order to pay interim maintenance to his wife but such dismissal can be reversed and the divorce proceedings can be revived if he comes forward to pay the arrears, the Madras High Court has ruled.
Justice V. Lakshminarayanan agreed with advocate S.P. Arthi that the divorce proceedings initiated by her client must be revived since he had now submitted before the court three demand drafts to the tune of ₹5.6 lakh towards interim maintenance arrears to his wife at the rate of ₹20,000 a month.
Though the counsel for the petitioner’s wife refused to receive the demand drafts, the judge directed the petitioner to deposit them to the credit of the divorce petition before the VI Additional Family Court in Chennai and said, the wife would be entitled to withdraw them any time, if she so desires.
The judge also set aside the Family Court’s July 6, 2024 order, through which the petitioner’s pleadings in the divorce plea were struck off on the sole ground of non adherence to the court order on payment of interim maintenance, and directed the presiding officer to continue the hearing on the divorce plea.
Ms. Arthi brought it to the notice of the judge that her client had originally initiated the divorce proceedings under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 before a Family Court at Jodhpur in Rajasthan in 2006 and obtained an ex-parte decree in 2008.
Subsequently, by virtue of the orders passed by the Supreme Court, his wife’s plea to set aside the ex-parte decree stood transferred to the Family Court in Chennai. The Family Court set aside the decree in 2022 and that order was confirmed by the High Court too in April this year.
Thereafter, the Family Court found that the husband had defaulted in payment of interim maintenace and therefore ordered that his pleadings in the divorce proceedings would be struck off if he does not pay the maintenance arrears within a reasonable time.
Since the petitioner did not pay the money even after that order, the Family Court struck off his pleadings and dismissed the divorce plea leading to the present civil revision petition. The wife’s counsel contended that the revision petition was not maintainable at all and that it should not be entertained.
However, ruling otherwise, Justice Lakshminarayanan said: “The purpose of granting interim maintenance to a wife is to ensure that she is able to survive the wrath of a litigation. The law presumes and holds out a protective umbrella for the wife in the form of interim maintenance so as to enable her to tide over the difficulties she faces when not being provided for by her husband.”
He went on to state: “I would look at it in another angle also. The wife, not earning any money by herself, would find it difficult to litigate the matter on her own steam. Hence, if maintenance is granted by the husband, it will level the playing field between the parties. Because of the husband being financially well-off, the field is skewed. This skewed field is made even by directing the husband to pay maintenance.”
The judge, further said: “The defence of the husband and his right to prosecute the petition stand eclipsed as long as he does not pay the maintenance. Once he realises his mistake or tides over the financial difficulties that he is facing and comes forward with the payment, then, it is the duty of the court to ensure that the eclipse that has been created by the procedure adopted by it, is removed. The advantage of the wife is that the amount that she is legally entitled to stands credited to her account.”
Published - September 04, 2024 09:57 pm IST
