Overlapping Jurisdiction To Grant Maintenance Under Different Legislations Leads To Conflicting Orders, 'Forum Shopping': Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has recently said that there is an overlapping of jurisdiction to grant interim maintenance under various enactments which leads to conflicting judgments or orders at different stages between the parties.

“Such conflicting Orders, in the similar facts and without any change in circumstances, under overlapping jurisdiction of different Acts, creates a sense of judicial impropriety and forum shopping, which may not be conducive to the majesty of the Courts,” a division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed.

The bench said that so long as the facts of a case are identical, maintenance granted by one Court essentially must be adopted by the other Court.

“However, if there are additional factors or varying circumstances, especially under the DV Act, 2005 which encompasses many more heads for granting monetary relief as compared to the interim maintenance under other statutes, the Court may grant additional amount of maintenance in view of the different heads, but not without considering the maintenance already granted in the earlier proceedings by another Court of competent jurisdiction,” the court said.

It added that once the permanent alimony has been granted under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 or Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the same cannot be and should not be varied or modified by subsequent interim maintenance orders, and party should approach the same Court which has granted permanent alimony to seek modification or variation in the light of the subsequent circumstances.

The court made the observations while dealing with a plea moved by a husband challenging a family court order vide which he was directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 30,000 to the wife under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The parties got married in 2011 and a boy was worn in 2014. They have been living separately since 2016. The husband moved a petition seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty by her.

The wife also filed a case against the husband under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and the interim maintenance to her was declined by observing

that she was a Post-graduate in Hindi and well qualified to meet her ends. However, monthly maintenance of Rs. 15,000 was allowed for the minor child.

Disposing of the plea, the court said that it was a case where the lady was not only educated and had a capacity to earn, but she was also having an independent income and had been earning by doing business.

“It is a known fact that in the matters of interim maintenance, neither party discloses truthfully their actual source of income, leaving the Court to do some guess work,” the court said.

Noting that it was only a case of interim maintenance, the court found that the wife had been earning, though intermittently and, therefore, she was not entitled to interim maintenance.

“However, it cannot be overlooked that she is maintaining the child exclusively who is now about 9 years old and is studying in Delhi Public School,” the court said.

Partly allowing the appeal, the court modified the order of interim maintenance and granted Rs. 20,000 monthly maintenance of the child.

Title: ABC v. XYZ

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1285

Click Here To Read Order