No Bar On Initiating Simultaneous Proceedings For Maintenance Under Different Statutes: Madras High Court Reiterates
The Madras High Court recently reiterated that as per the settled legal position, there is no bar or prohibition on initiating simultaneous proceedings for claiming maintenance under different statutes. The parties however should disclose about previous maintenance petition before the subsequent court. Justice Murali Shankar of Madurai Bench was deciding upon the plea of a husband, who...
The Madras High Court recently reiterated that as per the settled legal position, there is no bar or prohibition on initiating simultaneous proceedings for claiming maintenance under different statutes. The parties however should disclose about previous maintenance petition before the subsequent court.
Justice Murali Shankar of Madurai Bench was deciding upon the plea of a husband, who was seeking to quash the proceedings before the Family Court, Thiruchirappalli in which the wife had moved a Maintenance case.
The husband had contended that the wife had earlier filed a complaint under the Domestic Violence Act before the Mahila Court, Trichy. In this case, the Judicial Magistrate had granted monthly maintenance of Rs. 20,000 to the wife and Rs. 10,000 to their daughter. The Magistrate had granted residence and protection orders, orders for return of jewels and other Sridhana articles, and compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. It had also restrained the husband and others from committing Domestic Violence.
He submitted that the wife has now filed a parallel maintenance petition under Section 125 CrPC which is superfluous. This parallel maintenance is illegal and nothing but abuse of process of law.
Since parallel proceedings was the only ground on which the petitioner challenged the proceedings before Family Court and since this legal issue had already been decided by the Supreme Court, the High Court dismissed the petition as being devoid of merits.
At the same time, since the maintenance petition was pending since 2016, the court directed the Family Court to dispose off the matter within a period of two months.
Case Title: Mohammed Siddiq v. Rasheeda Begum and another
Case No: Crl OP (MD)No.1731 of 2019
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 418