No under guardians and wards act there is no child maintenance provision.

2. An application can be submitted before court to decide the maintenance application expiditely and prepond hearing date. On application the court shall allow.

Supreme Court in Nagendrappa Natikar Vs. Neelamma, AIR 2013 SC 1541 : said

Proceeding u/s 125 CrPC is summary in nature and intended to provide speedy remedy to wife.

Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena & Ors, AIR 2014 SC 2875 the Supreme Court held that any delay in adjudication of maintenance cases by the Family Court is not only against human rights but also against the basic embodiment of dignity of an individual. The object of the provisions for grant of maintenance is to provide speedy remedy for supply of food, clothing and shelter to the deserted wife and to prevent vagrancy and destitution. The observations of the Supreme Court are as under:

"2. The two issues that pronouncedly emanate in this appeal by special leave are whether the Family Court while deciding an application under Section 7 of the Family Court Act, 1984 (for brevity, "the Act") which includes determination of grant of maintenance to the persons as entitled under that provision, should allow adjournments in an extremely liberal manner remaining oblivious of objects and reasons of the Act and also keeping the windows of wisdom closed and the sense of judicial responsiveness suspended to the manifest perceptibility of vagrancy, destitution, impecuniosity, struggle for survival and the emotional fracture, a wife likely to face under these circumstances and further exhibiting absolute insensitivity to her condition, who, after loosing support of the husband who has failed to husband the marital status denies the wife to have maintenance for almost nine years as that much time is consumed to decide the lis and, in addition, to restrict the grant of maintenance to the date of order on some kind of individual notion. Both the approaches, as we perceive, not only defeat the command of the legislature but also frustrate the hope of wife and children who are deprived of adequate livelihood and whose aspirations perish like mushroom and possibly the brief candle of sustenance joins the marathon race of extinction. This delay in adjudication by the Family Court is not only against human rights but also against the basic embodiment of dignity of an individual.

3. Be it ingeminated that Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") was conceived to ameliorate the agony, anguish, financial suffering of a woman who left her matrimonial home for the reasons provided in the provision so that some suitable arrangements can be made by the Court and she can sustain herself and also her children if they are with her. The concept of sustenance does not necessarily mean to lead the life of an animal, feel like an unperson to be thrown away from grace and roam for her basic maintenance somewhere else. She is entitled in law to lead a life in the similar manner as she would have lived in the house of her husband. That is where the status and strata come into play, and that is where the obligations of the husband, in case of a wife, become a prominent one. In a proceeding of this nature, the husband cannot take subterfuges to deprive her of the benefit of living with dignity. Regard being had to the solemn pledge at the time of marriage and also in consonance with the statutory law that governs the field, it is the obligation of the husband to see that the wife does not become a destitute, a beggar. A situation is not to be maladroitly created whereunder she is compelled to resign to her fate and think of life "dust unto dust". It is totally impermissible. In fact, it is the sacrosanct duty to render the financial support even if the husband is required to earn money with physical labour, if he is able bodied. There is no escape route unless there is an order from the Court that the wife is not entitled to get maintenance from the husband on any legally permissible grounds.

xxx xxx xxx

9. A three-Judge Bench in Vimla (K.) v. Veeraswamy (K.)[2], while discussing about the basic purpose under Section 125 of the Code, opined that Section 125 of the Code is meant to achieve a social purpose. The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It provides a speedy remedy for the supply of food, clothing and shelter to the deserted wife.

xxx xxx xxx ...It has come to the notice of the Court that on certain occasions the Family Courts have been granting adjournments in a routine manner as a consequence of which both the parties suffer or, on certain occasions, the wife becomes the worst victim. When such a situation occurs, the purpose of the law gets totally atrophied. The Family Judge is expected to be sensitive to the issues, for he is dealing with extremely delicate and sensitive issues pertaining to the marriage and issues ancillary thereto. When we say this, we do not mean that the Family Courts should show undue haste or impatience, but there is a distinction between impatience and to be wisely anxious and conscious about dealing with a situation. A Family Court Judge should remember that the procrastination is the greatest assassin of the lis before it. It not only gives rise to more family problems but also gradually builds unthinkable and Everestine bitterness. It leads to the cold refrigeration of the hidden feelings, if still left. The delineation of the lis by the Family Judge must reveal the awareness and balance. Dilatory tactics by any of the parties has to be sternly dealt with, for the Family Court Judge has to be alive to the fact that the lis before him pertains to emotional fragmentation and delay can feed it to grow. We hope and trust that the Family Court Judges shall remain alert to this and decide the matters as expeditiously as possible keeping in view the objects and reasons of the Act and the scheme of various provisions pertaining to grant of maintenance, divorce, custody of child, property disputes, etc."

(Emphasis supplied)

1) you can after issue of notice to OP mention case before magistrate and request case be placed on board for urgent orders

2) mention that although more than 6 months have passed till date interim maintenance has not been awarded and you need money for child admission .

3) court can grant you interim reliefs

4)Under Section 12(1) of the Family court Act, the Court is empowered to make an interlocutory order so as to protect the person or property of the minor as it thinks fit. While considering an application for appointment of guardian, if it is found at an interlocutory stage that the welfare of the minor requires an amount be made available for being paid to the minor with a view to protect the person of the minor and his/her interests, such power would be available with the Court. Provisions of Section 12(1) of the said Act will have to be construed in a manner that would protect the person of the minor and if for such purpose grant of interim maintenance is warranted, the Court would be empowered in that regard.

5) you can claim interim maintenance under guardian and wards act

In Gayatri Bajaj Vs. Jiten Bhalla, (2012) 12 SCC 478, the Supreme Court in paragraph 7 observed thus:

"7. In a matter relating to the custody of children the first and the paramount consideration is the welfare and interest of the child and not the rights of the parents under a statute. Even the statutes, namely, the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 make it clear that the welfare of the child is a predominant consideration. In a matter of this nature, particularly, when the father and mother are fighting their case without reference to the welfare of the child, a heavy duty is cast upon the court to exercise its discretion judiciously bearing in mind the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration."

2)he Allahabad High Court in Khurshid Grover case has rightly observed that provisions of Section 12(1) of the said Act are of wide amplitude and no restrictive meaning should be given to said provisions. The welfare of the minor being the paramount consideration, the power to grant interim maintenance will have to be read in aforesaid provisions. Moreover, during pendency of proceedings when it is brought to the notice of the Court that the welfare of the minor requires to be taken care of by directing one party to pay an amount of interim maintenance, such power can surely be exercised in the facts of the case.

Firstly in which court is the case going on. There is a judgement which says ex parte ad interim may be passed.The case needs to be fought well by the lawyer.

1. In the said proceeding there is no provision to claim maintenance either interim or final.

2. Maintenance case filed under 125 crpc takes lot of time and hence it is advisable that you must file case for maintenance under PWDV Act. In such cases order comes relatively faster and both the proceeding can lie simultaneously.

Through high court you can get order for expeditious disposal of your pending interim petition.

Feel free to contact.

1. Maintenance can be sought for minor by filling a separate case.

2. You can file a petition for advancing the hearing from that date to present date.

Firstly, no there is no such law for maintenance in Gurdians act, but yes you have rightly filed it under 125 of CrPC.

Secondly, you should move an application for early hearing, and then you would be heard also plus interim maintenance would also be allowed.

Minor will get maintenance from biological father and no one can stop it. Keep the expenses list ready. Isnt your lawyer guiding you well or is he is hands in gloves with husbands lawyer

No, there can be no question to not to grant the maintenance to the minor as there is a well settled principal of law which says that minor is also the responsibility of the father though may not be the case of maintenance for mother if she is working.

So, would get for minor for sure.

Dear Madam,

In the following case the Supreme Court held that natural guardian/father is also liable to maintain the child under M and G Act.

In Gita Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India and Vandana Shiva v. Jayanta Bandhopadhaya, the Supreme Court has held that under certain circumstances, even when the father is alive mother can act as a natural guardian. The term 'after' used in Section 6(a) has been interpreted as 'in absence of' instead 'after the life-time'. -

Rights of guardian of person. -The natural guardian has the following rights in respect of minor children:

(a) Right to custody, .

(b) Right to determine the religion of children,

(c) Right to education,

(d) Right to control movement, and

(e) Right to reasonable chastisement

These rights are conferred on the guardians in the interest of the minor children and therefore of each- of these rights is subject to the welfare of the minor children. The natural guardians have also the obligation to maintain their minor children.

Further the interim maintenance applications are to be disposed of within 30 days failing which you may lodge a complaint with Registrar of Concerned High Court for directing such Magistrate to expedite the matter.

=========================================================================================

If we really excise our constitutional rights by approaching the High Court then Domestic Violence Case has to disposed within Six months, I am not lying the reality is in the following provision at fag end, please file WP in HC and get order of Mandamus against the Magistrate, accordingly:

12. Application to Magistrate.—

1. An aggrieved person or a Protection Officer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person may present an application to the Magistrate seeking one or more reliefs under this Act:

Provided that before passing any order on such application, the Magistrate shall take into consideration any domestic incident report received by him from the Protection Officer or the service provider.

2. The relief sought for under sub-section (1) may include a relief for issuance of an order for payment of compensation or damages without prejudice to the right of such person to institute a suit for compensation or damages for the injuries caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent:

Provided that where a decree for any amount as compensation or damages has been passed by any court in favour of the aggrieved person, the amount, if any, paid or payable in pursuance of the order made by the Magistrate under this Act shall be set off against the amount payable under such decree and the decree shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), or any other law for the time being in force, be executable for the balance amount, if any, left after such set off.

3. Every application under sub-section (1) shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed or as nearly as possible thereto.

4. The Magistrate shall fix the first date of hearing, which shall not ordinarily be beyond three days from the date of receipt of the application by the court.

5. The Magistrate shall endeavour to dispose of every application made under sub-section (1) within a period of sixty days from the date of its first hearing.

=============================================================================

In case of Divorce also Six month outer limit is provided under law:

“Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for an expeditious trial — to be concluded within a period of six months. However, the disposal of petitions before the trial courts take many years,” the court said.

=====================================================================================

It is in the hands of LITIGANTS how early they wish to conclude, it may be a request or by approaching the High Court ......For your kind information the relevant news its are below. Hope you will appreciate this information and award me fifth rank..

====================================================================================

Law deadline 60 days, cases stretch for years

AHMEDABAD: A resident of Shahpur , Shabanabanu Shaikh , filed a case in January 2009 under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, against her husband Mushtaq Shaikh . The protection officer submitted the 'domestic incident report' within two weeks.

The court concerned began proceedings — which the law stipulates must be concluded in 60 days — but has not yet taken any decision on her application for maintenance. The next hearing is scheduled for November 26.

The case of Bapunagar's Farzana Saiyed is no different. She too had filed in 2009 an application for maintenance against her husband and for shelter at her in-laws' house. Five years later, she is a widow and her case is still pending.

Most of the cases filed under the domestic violence law follow this grim pattern. It is the section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act which lays down the proviso that a magistrate will endeavor to dispose of every application within 60 days from the date of the first hearing. But that deadline is seldom maintained.

In fact, Dinesh Sharma, an advocate, says: "There is not a single instance of a domestic violence case, in my knowledge, that was completed within two months in city courts, unless the quarreling parties reached a compromise." Sharma says the format to be adopted by courts for these cases comes from the Criminal Procedure Code. "And criminal lawyers know ways to defer such proceedings," he says.

Another advocate, Imtiyaz Pathan, says that courts deal with DV cases in the same manner as they would handle other criminal cases. "There are some magistrates who give adjournments of more than three months in proceedings," he says.

The delay in court proceedings is the result of grave deficiencies in human and infrastructural resources to deal with women's complaints of domestic violence. Kashmira Kapadia is the only protection officer in Ahmedabad district, which receives more than 1,000 complaints every year. "Ideally there should be six protection officers in this district to expedite the processing of domestic violence complaints," she says.

Earlier, based on a TOI report, the Gujarat high court had taken suo motu cognizance of the issue and had ordered the state government, on February 22 last year, to fill vacancies and create infrastructure in protection officers' offices across the state. The vacancies are yet to be filled.

Times View

The Domestic Violence law makes it incumbent on magistrates to settle a case in 60 days. The reality is that often adjournments of two months are won by defence lawyers. This is a travesty of the law, especially since it lays down a deadline unambiguously. The law was created to offer speedy redress. So domestic violence cases should not be treated like any other litigation.

=====================================================================================

High Court wants divorce cases disposed of in 6 months

Directs trial courts to ensure speedier granting of alimony and maintenance to the ‘weaker spouse’.

Taking note of the undue delay in granting maintenance and alimony in divorce cases under the Hindu Marriage Act, the Delhi High Court has directed the lower courts to ensure that the trial in the matrimonial dispute cases be completed within six months as prescribed by the Act.

“No standard uniform practice and procedure is followed by the courts,” noted the court of Justice JR Midha, adding that in most cases, the provisions for interim maintenance and permanent alimony under Section 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act were not being utilised.

“Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for an expeditious trial — to be concluded within a period of six months. However, the disposal of petitions before the trial courts take many years,” the court said.

“This is matter of serious concern. It was certainly not the intention of the law that parties to a dissolved marriage suffer further misery of starvation in the absence of grant of alimony,” the court said.

Observing that most people resorted to “parallel proceedings” under the better known maintenance provisions under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure code, the court noted that parallel proceedings took more time and deprived the weaker spouse of maintenance.

The maintenance provisions under the Hindu Marriage Act apply to both spouses, meaning that the husband can also claim maintenance from wife at the time of divorce in case it is proved that he does not have sufficient income or assets.The directions have been issue after the court decided to hear nine separate pleas for maintenance filed by women whose husbands had filed for divorce.

The court noted that the disposal of cases had taken a long time, with the oldest of the nine cases dating back to 1996.

The court in its order has now directed that the spouse who files for divorce is required to file his or her affidavits with details of income, assets and expenditure, as required by Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, at the same time as the divorce plea, if they want to claim maintenance.

The respondent party should also file their affidavits within 30 days of the notice being issued, the court said.

Further, in order to protect the spouse who is the respondent in divorce proceedings, and is usually the party which claims maintenance, the court has said lower courts could consider directing the petitioner to deposit money to be paid to the respondent as litigation expenses.

The court has also prescribed that the affidavit and counter affidavit on income must be filed within six weeks of notice being issued on a divorce petition.

“If the disposal of maintenance application is taking time, and the delay is causing hardship, some ad interim maintenance should be granted to the claimant spouse,” the court said.

The court also said the time-table prescribed should be followed for all cases of maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act, Domestic Violence Act, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act as well as pleas under Section 125 CrPC.

The district courts have also been asked to file a report on the implementation of the time-table and on whether the suggestions have curbed the delay in matrimonial cases.

The maintenance for your child will not be rejected.

The expenses can be shared provided he makes a claim that way.

He has to prove your actual income for that.

You should seek maintenance for minor child under guardian and wards act

2) rely upon judgments cited by me

3) when both husband and wife are working both have to shoulder child responsibility

Even you are working then also you are entitled to maintenance for the child.

So you can file the case for maintenance under the provision of law as advised above.

You cannot claim interim maintenance under guardians and wards act but you can claim maintenance under section 125 of the code of criminal procedure. If opposite party is not diligent then the magistrate has power to grant interim maintenance as ex Parte. Section 125 of the code of criminal procedure is a social legislation and magistrate should not cause delay in granting maintenance. If opposite party is reluctant about the court proceeding then magistrate can decide the maintenance in absence of any reply of opposite party and pass ex Parte order.  if you think that magistrate may cause delay then you can proceed further and move an application before the high court under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure for expedite hearing of your case and dispose it of within stipulated time.

1. there is no provision for claiming interim maintenance under guardians & wards act.

2. Application for expeditious hearing of the case is to be filed, but at this stage nothing can be done before the date that has been given to you by the court in which the maintenance case is pending.

Regards

Hello,

I do not see any ground for the court to reject the maintenance for the child.

Also, there are chances that the court directs both of you to maintain the child.

Regards

Under 12(1) of the guardian and wards Act interim maintenance can be granted in form of interlocutory order for welfare of the minor.

Under the said Act, it is the welfare of the minor that has been granted prime importance. It is the duty of the Court while exercising powers thereunder to be satisfied that any order passed by it is for the welfare of the minor.

In Gayatri Bajaj Vs. Jiten Bhalla, (2012) 12 SCC 478, the Supreme Court in paragraph 7 observed thus:

"7. In a matter relating to the custody of children the first and the paramount consideration is the welfare and interest of the child and not the rights of the parents under a statute. Even the statutes, namely, the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 make it clear that the welfare of the child is a predominant consideration. In a matter of this nature, particularly, when the father and mother are fighting their case without reference to the welfare of the child, a heavy duty is cast upon the court to exercise its discretion judiciously bearing in mind the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration."

Under Section 12(1) of the said Act, the Court is empowered to make an interlocutory order so as to protect the person or property of the minor as it thinks fit. While considering an application for appointment of guardian, if it is found at an interlocutory stage that the welfare of the minor requires an amount be made available for being paid to the minor with a view to protect the person of the minor and his/her interests, such power would be available with the Court. Provisions of Section 12(1) of the said Act will have to be construed in a manner that would protect the person of the minor and if for such purpose grant of interim maintenance is warranted, the Court would be empowered in that regard. The Allahabad High Court in Khurshid Grover (supra) has rightly observed that provisions of Section 12(1) of the said Act are of wide amplitude and no restrictive meaning should be given to said provisions. The welfare of the minor being the paramount consideration, the power to grant interim maintenance will have to be read in aforesaid provisions. Moreover, during pendency of proceedings when it is brought to the notice of the Court that the welfare of the minor requires to be taken care of by directing one party to pay an amount of interim maintenance, such power can surely be exercised in the facts of the case. Also Bombay high court in Sreenivasagopalan ... vs Meenakshi Tripurari on 31 July, 2015 Bench: A.S. Chandurkar has ruled out the similar view.

1) it is in your intetest that both cases are clubbed together and heard in same court

2) it would help you in saving legal fees and you would get faster disposal

3) same judge would not continue till disposal of divorce case . Assignment of judges change

4) in your RCR case or in divorce case make application that husband be directed to pay admission fees

In WRIT PETITION NO. 3553 OF 2018 decided by THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY in the matter between

Mr.Prakash Kumar Singhee ...Petitioner

Versus

Ms.Amrapali Singhee ...Respondent

judgment pronounced on 04.05.2018, it has been decided that under the provisions of domestic violence act,

section 26 of the said Act provides for relief in other suits and legal proceedings. The said section contemplates that any relief available under Section 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 may also be sought in any legal proceeding, before the Civil Court, Family Court and a Criminal Court affecting the aggrieved person and the respondent whether such proceedings was initiated before or after the commencement of this Act.

Subsection2 of Section26 further provides that any such relief may be sought for in addition to and along with any other relief that the aggrieved person may seek in such suit or legal proceedings before a Civil or Criminal Court. Thus, by virtue of the Section26, any relief available under the Domestic Violence Act can also be sought in any legal proceedings before any Civil Court, Family Court or Criminal Court.

The term Domestic Violence has been given a specific connotation under Section 3 of the Act and any act, omission and commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it :

(a) harms or injuries or endangers the health, safety, life, limp or wellbeing, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbaland emotional abuse and economic abuse; or

(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any lawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or

(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause (a) or clause (b); or

(d) otherwise injuries or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.

While partly allowing the writ petition the high court passed the judgment thus:

The case has been remanded to the family court.

During the pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court on its remand, the petitioner husband would pay an amount of Rs.25,000/per month to the wife towards

her maintenance, till the Family Court decides the matter. The petitioner is also directed to bear the educational expenses of the son and would commit no default in payment of his school fees.

Therefore you can claim school fees also under section 20 of the DV act .

Since both the cases are related to same parties and are of matrimonial disputes, for the purpose of convenience and comparable in certain respects, the petitioner would hav sought for joint trial of both the cases by transferring the case to the same court where the divorce proceedings are going on.

It would be convenient for both of you to attend both the cases on the same dates though both the cases cannot be tried jointly.

The more legal action you take on such things, the more your cases will be delayed.

You can challenge his allegations during trial proceedings by denying them.

Firstly a litigant needs to understand the technicalities and process.

If a litigant is aggrieved by an order of the family court where already maintainance amount is passed and the litigant is not satisfied with such order passed should immediately move an appeal or revision petition before the session judge for enhancement or whatsoever the reason be. Many will suggest to move High Court but I will not suggest the same because if High Court incase rejects such plea no other court will pass orders for reliefs and going to Supreme Court may be out of bounds for one.

Best file revision or appeal before session judge.

Next is stopping of transfer can be made over a petition in the appeal court itself for early hearing. Delaying doesnt happen or orders are not passed for such.

1) You can get the Maintenance for you and your daughter. Daughter will be remain in the mother's custody till the age of 18 years of daughter.

2) You sticky to admission money and maintenance.

3) You can sticky Divorce, if he had filed for RCR you should work against it.