Is wife living in adultery entitled for maintenance?
According to the Karnataka High Court, a wife who is having an adulterous connection with another person cannot sue her husband for maintenance under section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act.
The revision appeal filed by the wife to overturn the ruling of the Sessions court, which in turn had overturned the order of support awarded to the wife by the Magistrate court after she made an application, was denied by a single judge bench of Justice Rajendra Badamikar.
The bench declared,
The oral and written evidence plainly demonstrates that the petitioner is dishonest with her spouse and has had extramarital encounters with a neighbor, despite her constant claims that she had lived with him.
The issue of the petitioner requesting support does not even come up when she is continuing her adultery.
The wife had requested a protection order under Section 12 of the Act, and the magistrate court had granted it.
The court also gave the wife maintenance of Rs. 1,500, Rs. 1,000 in the form of a rent allowance, and Rs. 5,000 in the form of compensation.
The husband appealed the decision before the sessions court, which invalidated the Magistrate's contested order.
The wife argued that because she and the respondent were married in a formal ceremony, it was the husband's responsibility to support his wife. According to the argument, domestic violence must be assumed because he is involved in an unlawful relationship with his relative.
The husband argued against the petition, saying the petitioner had eloped with a neighbor and had repeatedly expressed a desire to live with her lover rather than with him.
In light of her actions and having an unlawful relationship, he claimed that despite being a lawfully wedded wife, she is not entitled to support.
The husband's claim that his wife had eloped and was residing with a neighbor was corroborated by the bench as it reviewed the testimony of the witnesses he had called. Then it noticed,
Given the petitioner's dishonest behavior and adulterous lifestyle, it is impossible to believe her claim that she is a legally married wife and hence entitled to support.
The court rejected the wife's claim that the husband was having an extramarital affair with his sister-in-law's daughter, stating, "Since the petitioner is requesting maintenance, she must prove that she is honest and when she herself is not honest, she cannot point fingers towards her husband.
The learned Magistrate has failed to understand any of these elements and has mechanically granted the maintenance and compensation, which is a perverse order, it was noted after that. Given that the petitioner was leading an adulterous life, the learned Sessions court reevaluated the oral and documentary evidence and correctly rejected her claim.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 386
Your free access to Supreme Law News has expired
For further details contact:
Dr. Ajay Kummar Pandey
( LLM, MBA, (UK), PhD, AIMA, AFAI, PHD Chamber, ICTC, PCI, FCC, DFC, PPL, MNP, BNI, ICJ (UK), WP, (UK), MLE, Harvard Square, London, CT, Blair Singer Institute, (USA), Dip. in International Crime, Leiden University, the Netherlands )
Advocate & Consultant Supreme Court of India, High Courts & Tribunals.
Delhi, Mumbai & Dubai
Tel: M- 91- 9818320572. Email: editor.kumar@gmail.com
Website:
www.supremelawnews.com
www.ajaykr.com, www.4Csupremelawint.com
Facebook: /4Clawfirm, /legalajay Linkedin: /ajaykumarpandey1 Twitter: /editorkumar / YouTube: c/4cSupremeLaw Insta: /editor.kumarg
Telegram Channel
Whatsup Channel
Related
Newsletter
Subscribe to our mailing list to get the new updates!
Subscribe our newsletter to stay updated
