Bombay High Court Upholds Alimony Granted to Wife under Domestic Violence Act after She Accepted Maintenance under Customary Law

A single-judge bench of the Bombay High Court of SG Mehare just lately dismissed a revision plea filed by a husband whereas noting that he can’t declare that after customary divorce, the home relationship ceased, and the spouse shouldn’t be entitled to reliefs under the Domestic Violence Act.

The husband and spouse had been divorced by the customary regulation and an alimony of Rs 1,75,000 was granted to the spouse. The husband had filed a divorce petition on the bottom of cruelty and the spouse filed an utility under the Domestic Violence Act.

The Justice of the Peace court docket had denied aid to the spouse. However, on attraction, the extra periods decide granted aid to the spouse and directed the husband Rs 1,500 as lease and Rs 3,500 month-to-month upkeep to the spouse. The husband then approached the High Court in opposition to the order of the periods decide.

The court docket rejected the argument of the husband that home relation was not subsisting on the time of submitting of the appliance and relied on the apex court docket’s judgement of Prabha Tyagi whereby it was held that there needs to be a subsisting home relationship between the aggrieved particular person and the particular person in opposition to whom the aid claimed vis-a-vis allegations of home violence. The order reads, “In other words, even if an aggrieved person is not in a domestic relationship with the respondent in a shared household at the time of filing of an application under Section 12 of the DV Act but has at any point of time leave or had the right to leave and has been subjected to domestic violence or is later subjected to domestic violence on account of a domestic relationship is entitled to file an application under Section 12 of the DV Act.”

The court docket additional stated it was clear that even when an individual shouldn’t be in a home relationship with the respondent in a shared family can file an utility. The order states, “The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in clear words, answered that even if a person is not in a domestic relationship with the respondent in a shared household at the time of filing of the application under Section 12, but has at any point in time, he would so or had the right to live has been subjected to domestic violence is entitled to file an application under Section 12 of the DV Act.”

With respect to the customary divorce, the court docket stated that solely in sure circumstances customary divorce could also be thought-about and the divorce which has been granted under Hindu Marriage Act is just authorized and legitimate. Further, for claiming any customary proper, the events claiming such proper are certain to show that the customs of their caste or race nonetheless exist and the group at giant is usually observing such customs.

The court docket stated that because the spouse had approached the civil court docket there was no customary divorce in existence of their caste. The order reads, “Since the applicant approached the Civil Court for divorce, it can safely be held that the customary divorce was not in existence in their caste. Therefore, the respondent cannot claim that after the customary divorce, the domestic relationship ceased, and the applicant is not entitled to the reliefs under DV Act.”

Further, the court docket earlier than dismissing the revision utility filed by the husband stated, “The Law is well settled that the person aggrieved may take recourse under various Laws if the right exists. Since maintenance is allowed under Section 125 of the CrPC, the Law does not bar the person entitled to claim the relief under DV Act. Section 36 of DV Act provides that the DV Act is not in derogation of any other law. It is an additional provision of Law not affecting the other provisions of Law available for similar relief.”

Read all of the Latest India News right here