Divorce Maintenance

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Monday a plea filed by the mother of Atul Subhash, a Bengaluru-based engineer who committed suicide in 2024 alleging harassment by wife, seeking his minor son's custody. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Saish Chandra Sharma is likely to hear the plea by Anju Devi who has filed a habeas corpus petition, seeking the custody of her four-year-old grandson. On January 7, the top court had denied her the minor's custody saying she was "stranger to the child". Subhash, 34, who was found hanging at his house in Bengaluru's Munnekolalu on December 9 last year, purportedly left behind lengthy messages, blaming his wife and in-laws for pushing him to take the extreme step. During the last hearing, the top court was informed by the counsel appearing for Subhash's estranged wife Nikita Singhania that the child was studying at a boarding school in Haryana. Advocate Kumar Dushyant Singh, representing Devi, had sought the child's custody and alleged

In a significant judgement, the Supreme Court has ruled that a woman can be given the right to maintenance from her husband even after she has not complied with the decree to cohabit with her spouse if she has valid and sufficient reason to refuse to live with him. A bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar settled the legal dispute over the question whether a husband, who secures a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, stands absolved of paying maintenance to his wife by virtue of law if his wife refuses to abide by the said decree and return to the matrimonial home. The bench said there can be no hard and fast rule in this regard and it must invariably depend on the circumstances of the case. It said the question as to whether noncompliance with a decree for restitution of conjugal rights by a wife would be sufficient in itself to deny her maintenance, owing to Section 125(4) of CrPC has been addressed by several high courts but no consistent view is ...

The Supreme Court on Thursday said the strict provisions of law were for the welfare of women and not means to "chastise, threaten, domineer or extort" their husbands. Justices B V Nagarathna and Pankaj Mithal observed a Hindu marriage was considered to be a sacred institution, as a foundation for a family and not a "commercial venture". Notably, the bench observed the invocation of IPC sections including rape, criminal intimidation and subjecting a married woman to cruelty -- as a "combined package" in most of the complaints related to matrimonial disputes -- was condemned by the top court on several occasions. "The women need to be careful about the fact that these strict provisions of law in their hands are beneficial legislations for their welfare and not means to chastise, threaten, domineer or extort from their husbands," it said. The observations came when the bench dissolved the marriage between an estranged couple on the ground of its irretrievable breakdown. "The provisi

Earlier, Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) of Karnataka's Whitefield Shiv Kumar said that all three accused have been remanded to judicial custody

The Supreme Court clarified that these eight factors are not rigid rules but serve as guidelines for determining alimony

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that a Muslim woman can seek maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and said the "secular and religion neutral" provision is applicable to all married women irrespective of their religion. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 will not prevail over the secular law, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih said. "We are hereby dismissing the criminal appeal with the major conclusion that Section 125 would be applicable to all women...," Justice Nagarathna said while pronouncing the verdict. The two judges gave separate but concurring verdicts. Section 125 of the erstwhile CrPC, which deals with a wife's legal right to maintenance, covers Muslim women, the bench said. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 will not prevail over the secular and religion neutral provision of Section 125 of CrPC, it said while stressing that maintenance is not

Unfortunately, some couple ends their wedding mid-way due to different reasons, but here is a list of some of the most expensive divorce cases in the world

Husband allegedly lied about legally separating from his first wife when marrying his second wife in 1989 and attempted to evade support based on this technicality

Health issues, divorce, court battles, moral turpitude, and more can all distract the CEO and impinge on a company's performance. So, how much of their private life should a company disclose?

A single judge bench in Uttarakhand High Court observed that in cases of divorce both parents shared responsibility over a child

The stern message for the estranged husband came from Judge Ajay Goel, who took note of the fact that the woman, despite being well-qualified, had to quit her lucrative job to take care of her son

Court's ruling said that maintenance under the CrPC is a matter of public policy and a private consent deed cannot be allowed to override a public policy enacted for the larger good

But, there is no tax on lump sum alimony or transfer of physical assets

The man claimed that the woman was trying to take benefits by seeking court's sympathy