Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
15. The appellant/husband has further contended that in the parallel proceedings initiated by the respondent/wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "DV Act, 2005"), the learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide Order dated 22.06.2019, had observed that the respondent/wife was a Post-graduate in Hindi and was well qualified to meet her ends and she should stand on her own feet and work, instead of claiming maintenance from the appellant/husband,
23. In order to have a comprehensive view of the rival submissions of the parties, it is pertinent to observe that after the parties separated, the respondent/wife filed a Complaint Case No. V-290/2017 under the DV Act, 2005 and the interim maintenance Order was made on 22.06.2019, wherein the interim maintenance to the respondent/wife was declined by observing that the respondent/wife was a Post-graduate in Hindi and well qualified to meet her ends. However, Rs. 15,000/- per month was allowed for the maintenance of the minor child.
26. Consequently, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate disposed of the interim maintenance application under the DV Act, 2005 vide Order dated 25.11.2020, by observing that since Rs. 30,000/- per month has been granted by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, there is no reason to enhance the amount of interim maintenance fixed.
27. The relief of maintenance, as a practice, is being granted at two stages. One is the interim maintenance, while the second is by way of permanent maintenance/alimony. From the above narration of facts, what emerges is that there are various provisions for seeking interim maintenance as well as permanent maintenance under different statutes and the interplay between these statues is creating some confusion.
have been provided by way of immediate and interim relief. The most unique feature of the DV Act, 2005 is that while the remedies were essentially civil in nature, but considering the delays in civil adjudication, the procedures prescribed were of Cr.P.C., 1973. Under the DV Act, 2005, the provision for interim monetary relief was incorporated to provide the wife with immediate succour. The monetary relief as provided under Section 20 of the DV Act, 2005 is far more expansive than the right of interim maintenance recognized under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., 1973. The relief is not limited to maintenance but also included expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of domestic violence inter alia loss of earnings, medical expenses, the loss caused due to the destruction, damage or removal of any property from the control of the aggrieved person, in addition to the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any, including an Order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., 1973 or any other law for the time being in force.