Maintenance denied to educated wife who fails to do job without reason
Tis
Hazari District Court at Delhi: Dismissing an application under Section
24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), a single bench comprising of
Hon’ble Sujata Kohli, J refused interim maintenance to a woman stating
that she was professionally more qualified than her estranged husband,
and had failed to show why she didn't look for a job. The Court
dismissed the woman's plea after observing that she was a graduate from
Delhi University, held a diploma in library science and was once
employed as lab technician while her husband had only studied till
higher secondary. Since the applicant herself had failed to disclose the
reason for not doing any job in spite of being able bodied and
educationally and professionally qualified; and much better qualified
than the husband, she has failed to make out an entitlement for any
interim maintenance for herself.
Relying upon a judgment of the
MP high court in Mamta Jaiswal vs. Rajesh Jaiswal, 11(2000) DMC 170,
the Court reiterated that a woman who is fighting a matrimonial petition
filed for divorce, cannot be permitted to sit idle and to put her
burden on the husband during pendency of such petition. Taking
note of the legislative intent of Section 24 of HMA, the Court held
that the said provision is not meant for creating an army
of such idle persons who would be sitting idle waiting
for a 'dole' to be awarded by their husband who had gone to the
Court for seeking a relief against his wife. [Sunil Kumar v. Santosh,
HMA 374 of 2012, decided on 6th November, 2013]
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment