Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

This, however, does not conclude the controversy. The important question still remains: Was the Magistrate competent to award maintenance if under the personal law of the Mahomedans the wife had been validly divorced and had completed the period of Iddat ? In fact, s. 489 of the 1898 Code, as amended by the 1955 Amending Act, had empowered the Magistrate to make any alteration in the payment of the maintenance on proof of a change in the circumstances. Similarly, s. 489(2), which is extracted below, provided that the Magistrate could cancel the maintenance in consequence of a decision of any competent court:

In other words, under the Mahomedan Law the husband could still get the maintenance cancelled after divorcing his wife according to personal law if he paid the entire dower specified at the time of marriage.

We would however? Like to point out one peculiar aspect of the provisions of s. 127. While clause (b) of sub-section (3) of s. 127 does provide for cancellation of the maintenance on payment of dower if a woman has been divorced, the said clause does not contemplate cancellation of maintenance where a woman obtains divorce from her husband through a civil court under the provisions of the Act of 1939. In this connection clause (c) of sub-section (3) of s. 127, which is extracted below, clearly provides that where a woman obtains a divorce from her husband the amount of maintenance cannot be cancelled until she voluntarily relinquishes or surrenders her rights to the same:-

"the woman has obtained a divorce from her husband and that she had voluntarily surrendered her rights to maintenance after her divorce, cancel the order from the date thereof."

Thus, a clear distinction has been made between dissolution of marriage brought about by the husband in exercising his unilateral right to divorce and the act of the wife in obtaining a decree for the dissolution of marriage from a civil court under the Act of 1939.

We might further add that our conclusion that the second limb of clause (b) of the Explanation to s. 125 applies also to a situation, where a dissolution of marriage resulting in a decree for divorce brought about by the Act and at the instance of the wife, is fortified and reinforced by the language of clause (c) of sub-section (3) of s. 127 under which maintenance cannot be cancelled on the application of the husband unless the wife voluntarily surrenders her rights to maintenance or relinquishes the same and not otherwise. Thus, tho two limbs of clause (b) of the Explanation to s. 125(1) have separate and different legal incidents-one is reflected in clause (b) of subsection (3) of s. 127 and the other in clause (c) of sub-section (3) of s. 127.