She is working hence not entitled to get any maintenance from you. Fight the case on merit and try to prove that her case is based on false and fabricated facts. Feel free to call
Hi, I am a husband.Married nov 2014. We both shifted to our work location after marriage.After 15-30 days She started giving mental torture. She was not talking to me many times and not willing to make any physical relation with me.I always doubt that she had affairs with another guy. after 5 months of marriage she went to her parents house and logged a false dowry ,physical torture case against me and my family.Even she does not have any prove. She is demanding a monthly maintenance of 35000 and an amount 20 lacs. She is working in a mnc as a software engineer and her monthly income is 21000-25000 per month. My monthly income is around 58000 per month. I want to know do I need to give any maintenance to her?What about the 20 lacs she has demanded?
She is working hence not entitled to get any maintenance from you. Fight the case on merit and try to prove that her case is based on false and fabricated facts. Feel free to call
Ok Thanks for the ans. Now as this case will move towards divorce, will the court order for a final settlement amount. If yes what would be the approx amount?
Court will not pass any money until and unless refer the matter before marriage counsoler. If she filed Any application for alimony and you failed to prove your case only then the court may pass any order for alimony otherwise not.
1. Since your wife is working and earning on her own she is not entitled to claim maintenance from you. 2. To rebut her claim of 20 lacs you should contest the case to prove that she was never a victim of harassment in her matrimonial hime. 3. The court can order a final settlement only if there is an agreement between the spouses.
working wife is not entitled to maintenance number of judgement on said issue you dont have to pay her 20 lakhs demanded by her
wife is working as soft ware engineer in MNC . you many not have to any amount to your wife
THE COURT OF MS. MADHU JAIN ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE ROHINI COURT : DELHI M No. 28/07 Sh. Neeraj Aggarwal – Petitioner Vs. Mrs. Veeka Aggarwal – Respondent ORDER 1.. This is an order on application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act filed by the applicant/ wife, respondent in the main case (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) against the non-applicant/ husband, petitioner in the main case (hereinafter referred to as the non-applicant) for grant of maintenance pendentelite and for litigation expenses. 2.. In the application it is stated that the applicant/ wife has no independent source of income and she is not given any kind of maintenance by the non-applicant/ husband to live her life properly and therefore she is facing much hardship in the life. The non-applicant/ husband has flatly refused to maintain her. The non-applicant/ husband is working in a private sector as a Senior Software Engineer HPC in STM Microelectronics Pvt. Ltd., Plot No.1 A, Knowledge Park-2 (near LG Gol Chakkar), Greater Noida and is earning about Rs. 80,000/-pm. He has no other liability and he is not discharging his responsibilities towards the applicant/ wife with ulterior motives to harass and humiliate the applicant/ wife. The applicant/ wife is the legally wedded wife of the non-applicant/ husband and, thus, being a husband, he is bound to maintain the applicant/ wife. The applicant/ wife is fully dependent on the mercy of her parents, who are having other liabilities also and she has no independent source of income to maintain herself. It is, therefore, prayed that the non-applicant/ husband be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/-pm as maintenance allowance pendentelite to the applicant/ wife and expenses of proceedings. 3.. The application has been contested by the non-applicant/ husband, who in his reply has stated that the applicant/wife is a well qualified graduate Engineer in the field of information Technology and just after the marriage she had joined the service of a private firm and was drawing a handsome salary as initially she was taking Rs. 5000/-pm. Now-a-days she is competent and qualified to earn thousands of rupees per month. She is a qualified trained engineer and she is self stand financially in all respects. The non-applicant/ husband has never neglected or refused to maintain her in any manner and she was duly maintained during her stay in her matrimonial home. The non-applicant/ husband is still ready and willing to provide financial assistance or maintenance if required or needed by her for any purpose in any manner. It is not denied that the non-applicant/ husband is also a qualified engineer and is employed in Greater Noida, U.P. but the actual amount of monthly salary being drawn by him is Rs. 45,000/-pm. It is stated that he has to maintain his retired father and ailing, diabetic mother and old grandmother and also to treat his two married sisters and to look-after his younger unmarried under-education sister of marriageable age as his younger sister is doing B.Ed. from a regular college. He is also paying loan premiums and other household expenses. The applicant/ wife has herself deserted her matrimonial home without any threats or atrocities caused to her by her in-laws and she is not returning to her matrimonial home despite the petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the non-applicant/ husband. It is stated that the non-applicant/ husband is publicly and openly as well as warmly welcoming the applicant/ wife to her matrimonial home but she has started demanding maintenance sitting in her parental home to feed her greedy parents and selfish relatives instead of returning to her matrimonial home and to assist the non-applicant/ husband and her other in-laws in her matrimonial home at the time of need. It is stated that the conduct, attitude and nature of the applicant/ wife is of such type that she is not entitled for any maintenance. Further more, she has also filed a separate petition U/s 125Cr. P.C. for maintenance only with a view to get the non-applicant/ husband harassed in a criminal court. It is stated that the applicant/ wife is not a helpless or poor lady and she is not incapable to maintain herself as she is a well qualified engineer and is already an earning hand. She is handing over all her income to her parents. She does not require any monastery assistance from the non-applicant/ husband as she is already having a good bank balance in State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur at Rohini, Sector-5,Delhi , bearing A/c No. 61005521399 and several other bank accounts also. She also has some immovable properties in her name. It is denied that she requires Rs. 30,000/- as maintenance and other charges as prayed. It is, therefore, prayed that the application be dismissed with heavy cost. 4.. I have heard the Ld. Counsel for both the parties and have carefully perused the record. 5.. During the course of arguments it has not been denied by the Counsel for the applicant/ wife that the applicant/ wife herself is an engineer graduate in the field of Information Technology. Ld. Counsel for the applicant/ wife submitted that the applicant/ wife submitted that the applicant/ wife joined the job for some time after the marriage but thereafter due to the marital disputes she is not in a position to pursue her job and has left the same. In her entire application the applicant/ wife has no where stated that she is also an engineer graduate in the field of Information Technology and that she also joined the job after her marriage. Those seeking justice and equity from the Court must come to the court with clean hands. It seems that for obvious reasons and to extract money the applicant/ wife has not disclosed her true qualifications in the Court. The applicant/ wife is an engineer graduate and, therefore, can very well maintain herself and there is no need for her to depend upon the mercy of her parents or on the non-applicant/ husband. The purpose of Section 24 of H.M. Act is not to extract money from the other party and the court should not be a forum to extract the money or to blackmail the other party. In II (2000) DMC 170 titled as Mamta Jaiswal Vs. Rajesh Jaiswal, the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed as under:- “Section 24 – Pendente Lite Alimony : Purpose of Enactment : Not meant for supporting idle (Qualified) spouses waiting for ‘Dole’ to be Awarded by her husband – Section 24 has been enacted for purpose of providing monetary assistance to such spouse who is incapable of supporting himself/ herself in spite of sincere efforts – Spouse well qualified to get service immediately with less efforts is not expected to remain idle to squeeze out his/her purse by cut in nature of pendent elite alimony – Wife well qualified woman possessing qualification like M.Sc., M.C. M.Ed – How can such a lady remain without service – lady who is fighting matrimonial petition filed for divorce, cannot be permitted to sit idle and put her burden on husband for demanding – pendente lite alimony from him during pendency of matrimonial petition.” 6.. In I (2001) DMC 19 titled Sangitaben Rasiklal Jaiswal Vs. Sanjay Kumar Ratilal Jaiswal, Mehsana, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has held that the wife is entitled for Free Legal Aid and therefore, the Court should keep in mind that wife is entitled for free legal services also. 7.. In the present case the applicant/ wife is a well qualified engineer and, therefore, there is no need for her to sit idle at home waiting for the maintenance from the non-applicant/ husband. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case since the applicant/ wife is well qualified and, therefore, can earn handsome amount by working and there is no need for her to be financially dependent upon her parents or on the non-applicant/ husband, she is not entitled for any maintenance. While hearing arguments on the application it was ordered that the maintenance shall be granted to the wife till the disposal of the petition. This sentence in order sheet dated 27.08.2007 only means that the wife is entitled for the maintenance from the date of filing of the application till the disposal of the main petition and not thereafter. It no where reflects that the wife shall be entitled to maintenance I every case come what may. 8.. Therefore, in view of the above said discussion, the application U/s 24 Hindu Marriage Act of the applicant/ wife is dismissed. There shall be no orders as to cost. File be consigned to Record Room. Announced in Open Court Dated : 19.09.2007
n Smt.Mamta Jaiswal vs. Rajesh Jaiswal 2000(3) MPLJ 100, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh while dealing with identical situation observed that well qualified spouses desirous of remaining idle, not making efforts for the purpose of finding out a source of livelihood, have to be discouraged, if the society wants to progress. For better appreciation, relevant paragraphs of the said decision are reproduced hereunder:- "In view of this, the question arises, as to in what way Section 24 of the Act has to be interpreted. Whether a spouse who has capacity of earning but chooses to remain idle, should be permitted to saddle other spouse with his or her expenditure? Whether such spouse should be permitted to get pendent lite alimony at higher rate from other spouse in such condition? According to me, Section 24 has been enacted for the purpose of providing a monetary assistance to such spouse who is incapable of supporting himself or herself inspite of sincere efforts made by him or herself. A spouse who is well qualified to get the service immediately with less efforts is not expected to remain idle to squeeze out, to milk out the other spouse by relieving him of his or her own purse by a cut in the nature of pendent lite alimony. The law does not expect the increasing number of such idle persons who by remaining in the arena of legal battles, try to squeeze out the adversary by implementing the provisions of law suitable to their purpose. In the present case Mamta Jaiswal is a well qualified woman possessing qualification like M.Sc. M.C M.Ed. Till 1994 she was serving in Gulamnabi AzadEducation College. It impliedly means that she was possessing sufficient experience. How such a lady can remain without service? It really put a big question which is to be answered by Mamta Jaiswal with sufficient cogent and believable evidence by proving that in spite of sufficient efforts made by her, she was not able to get service and, therefore, she is unable to support herself. A lady who is fighting matrimonial petition filed for divorce, cannot be permitted to sit idle and to put her burden on the husband for demanding pendente lite alimony from him during pendency of such matrimonial petition. Section 24 is not meant for creating an army of such idle persons who would be sitting idle waiting for a „dole? to be awarded by her husband who has got a grievance against her and who has gone to the Court for seeking a relief against her. The case may be vice versa also. If a husband well qualified, sufficient enough to earn, sit idle and puts his burden on the wife and waits for a ?dole? to be awarded by remaining entangled in litigation. That is also not permissible. The law does not help indolents as well idles so also does not want an army of self made lazy idles. Everyone has to earn for the purpose of maintenance of himself or herself, at least, has to make sincere efforts in that direction. If this criteria is not applied, if this attitude is not adopted, there would be a tendency growing amongst such litigants to prolong such litigation and to milk out the adversary who happens to be a spouse, once dear but far away after an emerging of litigation. If such army is permitted to remain in existence, there would be no sincere efforts of amicable settlements because the lazy spouse would be very happy to fight and frustrate the efforts of amicable settlement because he would be reaping the money in the nature of pendent lite alimony, and would prefer to be happy in remaining idle and not bothering himself or herself for any activity to support and maintain himself or herself. That cannot be treated to be aim, goal of Section 24. It is indirectly against healthiness of the society. It has enacted for needy persons who in spite of sincere efforts and sufficient effort are unable to support and maintain themselves and are required to fight out the litigation jeopardizing their hard earned income by toiling working hours
1. A working lady is not entitled to maintenance unless there is great disparity in the respective income. 2. In your case since her income is enough to maintain her, she is not entitled to maintenance. 3. The court does not grant final settlement amount though it may fix a token amount as permanent alimony.
If you were married as recently as Nov-2014, you may have to wait for filing divorce case atleast one year from the date of marriage and not before that. Since she is employed and earning a handsome salary, she may not be entitled to monthly maintenance for sustenance and her demand of Rs. 20 lakhs is exorbitant and illegal. What is the reason that she claims such a huge amount? You can deny her claim and take precaution for her further onslaughts like many more criminal complaints including domestic violence case against all the members of your household.
Hi, as per the Supreme Court ruling if the wife has sufficient source to earn her livelihood then she is not eligible for claiming maintenance from her husband. 2. The quantum of maintenance is depending upon facts and circumstances of each case there is no hard and fast rule for granting maintenance.
1. She is not entitled to any maintenance since she is employed, 2. Contest the case filed by her fittingly, 3. Since she has left your place if her own, she is not entitled to any compensation, 4. Engage a lawyer having expertise in this field.
1. File the divorce suit after completion of one year of marriage on the ground of her mental cruelty, 2. Filing false case is also treated as mental cruelty, 3. It is not necessary that court will ask you to pay her maintenance, 4. so, the amount can not be foretold in any way.
Hi All, Giving an update to the above case. The above case filed by my wife in SDJM court. But hearing of the case not even started as we have filed a transfer petition in high court which is also pending. So to take revenge my wife and their family came to our local police station ,filed a FIR .They have written the same story in the FIR as there in the above case but added an additional charge of 307 (Which was not there in 1st case) along with other dowry torture charges. They have given some bribe to police. The next they came to my home along with police and seized the house hold items they had given. There they had misbehaved my family members.Anyways we have got the Anticipatory bail from high court. Questions: 1)What should be our next step ? 2)The police has still not given the sizer report even we have requested many times.How that will matter? 3)What is role of police in the above case? 4)We are planning to request honb. high court to quash the criminal case (FIR) as the charges are same but they have added 307 just to harass us ?what is the chance quashing of this case? 5)Should we file divorce case after completion of 1yr on the ground of mental cruelty? 6)Is there any automatic divorce after filing 498A. (I have heard from some lawyers that after 2 years of marriage I can take court permission and get married again.)
1) you have to contest case on merits 2) police have to carry out investigations 3) it is doubtful that high court will quash 498A case 4)file for divorce on grounds of mental cruelty after expiry of one year from date of marriage
1) There is no automatic divorce after filing of 498A 2) you have to file for divorce 3) if you prove allegations made in complaint you would be granted divorce
1)What should be our next step ? You may file a quash petition before high court for quashing FIR since similar complaint is already pending before another court and it is double jeopardy. 2)The police has still not given the sizer report even we have requested many times.How that will matter? What is sizer report?, do you mean to say about the household items she has taken in the presence of police, they need not because they have not seized the articles. 3)What is role of police in the above case? The police is acting on the grafts received, so they may intentionally harm you to satisfy that party. 4)We are planning to request honb. high court to quash the criminal case (FIR) as the charges are same but they have added 307 just to harass us ?what is the chance quashing of this case? See my answer to the first question. 5)Should we file divorce case after completion of 1yr on the ground of mental cruelty? If there is no change in her mentality as well as behavior, you may try that. 6)Is there any automatic divorce after filing 498A. (I have heard from some lawyers that after 2 years of marriage I can take court permission and get married again.) Dont be misguided with false informations. There is nothing called automatic, you have to contest, fight the legal battle for divorce.
1.Your next step should be to stay alert and contest the cases filed against you fittingly, 2. It is strange. Police is duty bound to make a list of what they have seized from you and take your signature on the list. They are also supposed to give you a copy of the list. In absence of the same, you should not have handed over the items to the police. Write a letter to the police seeking a copy of the said list, 3. Police will investigate about the complaint lodged against you. Develop a good rapport with the iO in your interest, 4. Normally High Court entertains the Quash application after charge sheet is filed, 5. Yes, file the divorce case after completion of one year of marriage, 6. There is nothing called automatic divorce. Get the decree of divorce from the Court first, then get remarried.
1. You should now contest the case on merits to prove your innocence. 2. The report may be added in the chargesheet. 3. If you can prove that 307 is not made out then you may succeed in the HC. 4. You have to take call on whether to file for divorce or not. 5. There is nothing such as 'automatic divorce'.