[Article 142] Supreme Court Issues Directions For Sale And Attachment Of Assets To Clear Arrears Of Maintenance To Woman Abandoned By Husband

The Supreme Court recently directed sale of ancestral property of a man to pay arrears of maintenance of Rs. 1.25 Crores to his wife under its inherent powers under Article 142.

A bench of Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar relied on decisions of the Apex Court in Subrata Roy Sahara V Union Of India [2014] 12 SCR 573 and Delhi Development Authority V. Skipper Construction 1996 (2) Suppl. SCR 295 to observe that the Supreme Court is not powerless, but can issue appropriate directions, and even decrees, for doing complete justice between the parties.

The Court was considering applications filed by the wife seeking recovery of arrears of maintenance and monthly maintenance on the ground that she was living with her widowed mother, and was dependent on her for her expenses. She sought a direction from the Court to direct the family court to decide her petition under Section 125(3) of CrPC within 6 months. Section 125(3) empowers a Magistrate to issue a warrant or sentence a person who, without sufficient cause, fails to comply with the order for payment of maintenance.

In this case, after the marriage between the husband and wife had deteriorated, various legal proceedings were initiated. The wife had pressed criminal charges against the husband. His anticipatory bail application was rejected. Following this, he failed to participate in the criminal proceedings or in the maintenance proceedings. Criminal charges under Sections 420, 406, 468, 34, 120B of Indian Penal Code were also pressed against the father in law and mother in law who were also denied anticipatory bail. The Court had directed them to deposit Rs.40 lakhs towards arrears of maintenance, which they failed to do. However, the Court eventually released them on bail.

In the claim for maintenance filed by the wife in the family court, the court had granted interim maintenance of 1,00,000/- per month in 2016, which was later enhanced to Rs. 1,27,500/- per month.

The Apex Court observed that despite different orders of the courts directing payment of maintenance by the husband and the father-in-law, they had failed to do so.

“The present case – as discussed earlier, has displayed persistent defiant conduct by Varun Gopal, and the petitioner, Mohan Gopal, who have, through one pretext or another stalled compliance with the orders of this court. It is the responsibility of Petitioner and Varun Gopal who are held liable to fulfil the payment of entire sum."

The Court also noted that the husband had the means to make the payment:

“The past history of this case, and the orders of this court have demonstrated the utter obduracy of Varun Gopal, who abandoned the wife, and virtually fled to Australia. The documents placed on record of this court, including the affidavits filed by the petitioner, and the bank account statements, reveal that considerable amounts of money were remitted to Varun Gopal, over a period of time. “

The wife had claimed that the husband was the sole heir of his father and was to inherit 11 shops in ancestral property. She claimed that Rs. 1.25 Crore was due to her in maintenance arrears. 

The Court passed the following directions including sale of 6 shops for recovery of the amount due to the wife:

(1) Six contiguous shops bearing municipal numbers 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 shall be put to sale by the Registrar of the Delhi High Court, who shall ensure that the best prices are realized. The amounts realized from the sale shall be deposited in a fixed deposit receipt, initially for six months, and its interest, disbursed to the second respondent/applicant. In the event of no sale, the attachment of property shall continue in favour of the applicant.

(2) The attachment of rents of M/s Fitness Factory Gym & Spa on the First Floor shall be continued, till the petitioner, and his son, Varun Gopal, pay the amount constituting the balance between the amount realized by direction (1) and Rs. 1.25 crores.

(3) In the eventuality the directions in (2) are not complied within one year, the Registrar is directed to take steps, and within three months, and seek option from the applicant regarding whether she would wish the transfer of title to the said premises in her name, or its sale. In the event she opts for the transfer, the Registrar Delhi High Court, is directed to take all necessary steps to execute a conveyance deed (under the present directions) to that effect, the sale shall be registered by the concerned authorities, and the applicant shall be handed over symbolic possession.

(4) In the event the applicant does not seek conveyance, the Registrar shall take all necessary steps to auction the said property (on the first floor described in (2) above, within 18 months from today.

(5) All amounts realized in the process of compliance with directions (1) and (4) above shall be paid to the applicant. Decree shall be drawn to the above effect. Decree shall also reflect total amount due and payable to the applicant in lieu of which sale of shops are hereby ordered.

Case Details: Manmohan Gopal V. State Of Chhattisgarh., Miscellaneous Application Nos. 858-859 of 2021 in Criminal Appeal No.(s) 85-86 of 2021

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 921

Click here to read/download judgment