False DV case filed against husband what to do

904 votes

Hi,
You can challenge the court order. But you need to consult a lawyer with all relevant documents. It depends on many factors that how much maintenance should be paid. To give you more detailed legal advice I need to know the facts in details.

LawRato LawRato

899 votes

Please go through this carefully and get in touch.

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to grant interim maintenance to a wife who is Chartered Accountant by profession. The court ruled that the wife, who is well qualified with sufficient experience in profession, is expected to be able to sustain herself and need not be granted interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The wife had petitioned against the Family Court’s verdict denying interim maintenance to her considering her qualifications and supposed financial independence, given her 13 years of experience as a Chartered Accountant. An amount of ₹22,900 per month towards the maintenance to her two children was, however, awarded by the court. The couple got married on July 16, 2005, in Delhi, had two children and lived together till 2013. The woman is a CA while her husband is an Electrical Engineer but runs his own business. After the filing of divorce petition by the husband, the wife filed an application seeking interim maintenance for a sum of ₹3 lakh per month for herself and the two children, and ₹1.1 lakh towards litigation expenses. The court had struck down the demand and also observed that the parties were indulging in jugglery of accounts to present a misleading picture of their financial status. The petitioner’s claim that she was earning only ₹7000 per month was put down by the court on the basis of illogicality of the claim. The bench comprising of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Pratibha Rani observed that ‘Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act makes a provision for award of interim maintenance to a spouse who has no independent income sufficient to support herself and fight the legal battle. In the judgment in Manokaran @ Ramamoorthy Vs. M. Devaki, the High Court of Madras while construing the provision of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and relying on its earlier decision reported as Kumaresan Vs.Aswathi held that for grant of maintenance, the party should not have sufficient independent income for her/his support’. The court also referred to the observations made under Mamta Jaiswal Vs. Rajesh Jaiswal with respect to award of interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to a well qualified spouse having the earning capacity but desirous of remaining idle. Such a spouse, according to the judgment, is unworthy of any financial entitlement from the separated partner. The court held that the decision taken by the Family Court was a balanced one and did not call for any interference. The impugned judgment was thus upheld.

Advocate Aveek Bose LawRato

826 votes

Against the order of 5th J.M in c/w misc case : 217/14 regarding order of interim maintenance , you shall have to file an appeal before the Session Judge Burdwan u/s. 29 of p.W.D. v Act, 2005 challenging the order of the 5 th J.m . This is the way to reduce the amount of maintenance , but that must have been filed within 30 days of the order.

Advocate Sudip Mukherjee LawRato

776 votes

There is nothing mentioned in PWDV act as monitory relief amount. Magistrate pass interim order on basis of respondents financial condition. if you mentioned your financial condition in WS properly you may file revision to uper court.

Advocate Bhrigu Datta LawRato