The Bombay High Court, while quashing the order of the sessions court refusing maintenance to a second wife by the husband, held that it was not required for the woman to prove her marriage through documentary evidence, if the couple lived together.
The woman had challenged a 2005 order of the Kolhapur sessions court, which had, while allowing the maintenance of Rs500 to the daughter, turned down that of the woman on the grounds that the husband was already married and his spouse was alive.
The husband argued before the High Court that maintenance under section 125 of the CrPC can only be granted to the legally married wife. This ground was strongly opposed by the woman, saying that it was a summary remedy and the same was not intended to affect the civic rights of the party.
After going through several Supreme and High Court judgments, the court held, "In matters of this nature, it is sufficient if the claimant prima facie satisfies the court that the claimant and respondent have lived as husband and wife. There is no requirement of even proving the essential ceremony that normally goes with a marriage. The woman is proved to be the respondent's second wife."
The court, thus, directed the husband to pay Rs500 per month maintenance and a cost of Rs5,000 to the woman.
The woman had challenged a 2005 order of the Kolhapur sessions court, which had, while allowing the maintenance of Rs500 to the daughter, turned down that of the woman on the grounds that the husband was already married and his spouse was alive.
The husband argued before the High Court that maintenance under section 125 of the CrPC can only be granted to the legally married wife. This ground was strongly opposed by the woman, saying that it was a summary remedy and the same was not intended to affect the civic rights of the party.
After going through several Supreme and High Court judgments, the court held, "In matters of this nature, it is sufficient if the claimant prima facie satisfies the court that the claimant and respondent have lived as husband and wife. There is no requirement of even proving the essential ceremony that normally goes with a marriage. The woman is proved to be the respondent's second wife."
The court, thus, directed the husband to pay Rs500 per month maintenance and a cost of Rs5,000 to the woman.
Comments
Post a Comment