HAMA | Widow Daughter-In-Law Can Claim Maintenance From Father-In-Law If She Is Unable To Obtain Maintenance From Her Husband's Estates: Chhattisgarh HC

"It is the well settled proposition of law that the manager of a joint Mitakshara family is under a legal obligation to maintain all male members of the family, their wives and their children, and on the death of one of the male members he is bound to maintain his widow and his children."

Factual Background:

The respondent had married to the son of the appellant on 11-7-2008. The husband of the respondent died on 21-6-2012. As per the version the respondent, after the death of her husband there was a considerable change in the behaviour of in-laws towards her and she was almost deserted in the family. Subsequently, she was taken to her parental home.

The respondent further pleaded that the bank passbook and ATM card, which belong to her husband were kept by the in-laws. The respondent also pleaded that ancestral property of 11.78 acres and 3.97 acres of agricultural land were held by the appellant. In addition, three shops and house situated at different places, wherein right of her late husband is also vested. According to the respondent, she had no source of income to maintain herself, as such, an amount of Rs. 7,000/- per month was claimed towards her maintenance.

The family Court, after evaluating the evidence, by the order impugned directed the appellant to pay an amount of Rs. 2,500/- per month towards maintenance of the respondent. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed the appeal against the said order.

Contentions of the Appellant:

Mr. Sanjay Patel, counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that to get the maintenance from the father-in-law, the daughter-in-law is required to prove that she does not have any source of income and she is unable to get the maintenance from the estate of her husband. He contended that these facts have not been proved by the respondent by placing reliable and cogent evidence.

He further submitted that the document filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the CPC before the High Court highlights that the lands have already been recorded in the name of the respondent. Therefore, it was suggested that she can earn her livelihood from such properties and consequently, the father-in-law cannot be forced to pay the maintenance. To provide support to his argument, he placed reliance on the decisions rendered by the Chhattisgarh High Court in Dayali Sukhlal Sahu v. Anju Bai Santosh Sahu, 2010 (3) CGLJ 459 and Parwati v. Danpatra Singh and Ors.

Contention of the Respondent:

Mr. Sourabh Sahu, counsel for the respondent, submitted that the respondent is unable to maintain herself and the property, which was held by the appellant as a manager, is a coparcenary property, wherein the right of the deceased husband of the respondent was vested. He further contended that since the amount of maintenance was not paid from the estate of her husband, as such she was entitled to get maintenance from her father-in-law.

Court's Observations:

The Court observed that as per the provisions enumerated under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, a widowed daughter-in-law can claim maintenance only if she is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or out of estate of her husband or her father or mother, or from her son or daughter, if any, or his or her estate. The right to claim maintenance by widowed daughter-in-law is conditional.

The Court further clarified that the father-in-law having the possession of coparcenary property, out of which widowed daughter-in-law has not obtained any share, has the right to receive maintenance from him. However, that would be limited to the share of coparcenary property held by the father-in-law in his hand in which the widowed daughter-in-law has not taken any share.

The Court held that preferential right under sub-section (1)(a) of Section 19 indicates that the widowed daughter-in-law would be entitled to claim maintenance firstly from the estate of her husband and thereafter claim can be made from her father or mother. Though the word in Section 'or' is used, which gives the right to a widow to claim from either of the people enumerated in Section, yet the Section is sub divided into part (a) & (b). So, the preferential precedents exist giving an option to widow. Thus, it is clear that the estate of husband comes first to claim maintenance by widow, the Court added.

Accordingly, it was concluded,

"In view of the above stated facts and circumstances, when the estate of the husband is held in the hands of the father-in-law, the daughter-in-law cannot be forced to leave the estate of her husband and to follow the estate of her father or mother. Thus, we are of the considered view that the estate of husband can be preferred to claim over the father or mother of the daughter-in-law. Consequently, we hold that the daughter-in-law (respondent herein) would be entitled to claim maintenance from the father-in-law."

Case Title: Nand Kishore Lal v. Shrimati Chanchala Lal

Case No.: FAM No. 200 of 2015

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Chh) 52 

Judgment Dated: 4^th July 2022

Coram: Goutam Bhaduri & Deepak Kumar Tiwari, JJ.

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Advocate

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Chh) 52