NON DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS IN THE CASE OF MAINTENANCE

Everyone has a right to have a lifestyle with basic amenities like food, clothes and shelter and other necessities. As per the principles of social justice, it is the duty of man to provide his wife, children and parents with the necessities to live a dignified life in the form of maintenance. Hence, the maintenance laws in India lay down the duty of man to provide the maintenance to his family. Maintenance is not merely a legal right but it is also a basic human right.

Maintenance is the amount of money paid by the man to his wife, parents or/ and children to support them financially and this amount can be paid once in a lump sum amount or in installments. Maintenance laws have been implemented as a measure of social justice to prevent discrimination and to provide security to poor, abandoned and helpless women. It also provides protection for helpless parents and children along with the wife. The husband is liable to pay the maintenance to his family notwithstanding the fact that whether he has sufficient means to pay the amount for maintenance or not. Under the muslim law, wife has the absolute and ultimate right to claim maintenance whereas in the Hindu law, the wife can also be liable to pay the maintenance to the husband if he is incapable of earning for his livelihood or if the wife is earning enough for her maintenance. In the case titled Amit Kumar vs. Navjot Dubey, the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana refused to interfere with the decision of the lower court where the maintenance pendente lite under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 was provided to the wife who was earning more than her husband. But a husband who is capable of earning but still is not earning is not liable to get maintenance from the earning wife. Hence, the husband has to prove his inability to work if he is not working and demanding maintenance from the earning wife. The provisions for maintenance have been given under Special Marriage Act, 1954, Section 125 of the CrPC 1973; and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. These provisions are applicable to all the citizens irrespective of their religion. The husband not only has to maintain his wife till the time they are together but also in case they separate. There are many cases where the spouse does not disclose his/her true financial status or lifestyle which forces the courts to make an estimation while determining the amount of maintenance that should be granted.

In the case of Jayant Bhargava V. Priya Bhargava, (Delhi High Court, 2011)

The court held that the wife is entitled to live in a similar status as she was living in her matrimonial home. Court must ensure that if one spouse is living in comfort and luxury then the other spouse should not live a life of deprivation and poverty.

In the case of Radhika Petitioner V. Vineet Rungta (Delhi High Court, 2004)

The court observed in this case that parties do not always disclose their true income and therefore the last resort left with the court is to fix the maintenance according to the status and lifestyle of the parties. Hence, if the warring spouse hides the income, the maintenance shall be fixed based on the lifestyle of that spouse as it is a safer and more secure way. The income can be concealed but the status is clearly visible to all concerned. If an opulent lifestyle is enjoyed by the warring spouse, that spouse can’t complain that he has a scanty income.

As per section 10 of Family Courts Act 1984, the Family Court is free to evolve its own rules of procedure and grants the Family Court a duty to determine the truths of the facts alleged by one party and denied by another.

In the case of Bharat Hedge V. Saroj Hedge, 11 factors were culled out which are to be considered while deciding an application under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act which are:

  1. Status of the parties
  2. Reasonable wants of the claimant
  3. The independent income and property of the claimant
  4. The number of persons, the non-applicant has to maintain
  5. The amount should aid the applicant to live in the similar lifestyle as he/ she enjoyed in the matrimonial home
  6. Non applicant’s liabilities, if any
  7. Provisions for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance, treatment, etc.
  8. Payment capacity of the non-applicant
  9. Some guess work is not ruled out while estimating the income of the non-applicant when all the sources or correct sources are not disclosed
  10. The non-applicant to defray the cost of litigation
  11. The amount awarded under section 125, crpc is adjustable against the amount awarded under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act

In the case of Rajnesh vs Neha, 2020

This case became a very important case in this matter as it established certain guidelines for accurate evaluation of assets of both the parties for settling the amount of maintenance. The most important observations made in this case is as follows:

“The party claiming maintenance either as a spouse, or as a partner in a civil union, live-in relationship, common law marriage, should be required to file a concise application for interim maintenance with limited pleadings, along with an Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities before the concerned court, as a mandatory requirement. On the basis of the pleadings filed by both parties and the Affidavits of Disclosure, the Court would be in a position to make an objective assessment of the approximate amount to be awarded towards maintenance at the interim stage”.

In exercising the powers of court under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution which states “The Constitution of India under Article 136 vests the Supreme Court of India, the apex court of the country, with a special power to grant special leave, to appeal against any judgment or order or decree in any matter or cause, passed or made by any Court/tribunal in the territory of India” that is read with Article 142, the court has also issued guidelines:

  1. The Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities shall be filed by the parties in all the proceedings of maintenance, including the proceedings pending before the concerned Family Court / District Court / Magistrate’s Court, as the case may be;
  2. The applicant claiming the maintenance shall will be required to file a concise application along with the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets;
  3. The respondent must submit the reply along with the Affidavit of Disclosure within a period of four weeks being the maximum. The respondent may not be granted more than two opportunities for the submission of the said Affidavit.
  4. In case of delay by the respondent, in filing the reply with the Affidavit, and seeks more than two adjournments for this purpose, the Court may consider exercising the power to strike off the defense of the respondent, if the conduct is found to be willful in delaying the proceedings. If the Affidavit is not filed within the prescribed time, the Family Court may proceed to decide the application for maintenance on basis of the Affidavit filed by the applicant and the pleadings on record.
  5. In case of any dispute with respect to the declaration made in the Affidavit of Disclosure, the aggrieved party may seek the permission of the Court to serve interrogatories, and seek production of relevant documents from the opposite party under Order XI of the CPC; On the filing of the Affidavit, the Court may invoke the provisions of Order X of the C.P.C or Section 165 of the Evidence Act 1872, if it considers it necessary to do so;
  6. The income of one spouse is often not within the knowledge of the other spouse. The Court may invoke Section 106 of the Evidence Act, 1872 if necessary since the income, assets and liabilities of the spouse are within the personal knowledge of the party concerned.
  7. If the financial situation of a party changes, or any specific circumstances change, or if any new information becomes available during the trial, the party can file an updated or supplementary affidavit, which the court will consider at the time of final judgement.
  8. The pleadings made in the applications for maintenance and replies filed should be responsible pleadings; if false statements and misrepresentations are made, the Court may consider initiation of proceeding u/S. 340 Cr.P.C., and for contempt of Court.
  9. In case the parties belong to the Economically Weaker Sections (“EWS”), or are living Below the Poverty Line (“BPL”), or are casual labourers, the requirement of filing the Affidavit would be dispensed with.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Image
On 12 January 2021, the Supreme Court of India took up the petition filed by Dr. Nilakshi Choudhury, Advocate, Supreme Court, on behalf of the aggrieved advocates and public at large for the reopening of all courts in the country including the Supreme Court of India. A three judge bench headed by the CJI S.A. Bobde, observed that the decision to convene Court proceedings via video conferencing is taken after extensive deliberations with medical experts. The Petitioner-in-Person pleaded that advocates and their staff are not able to pay their rent and are unable to maintain their livelihood. Also, hearing through Video conferencing is a violation to Article 145(4) that clearly states, “ No Judgement shall be delivered by the Supreme Court save in open court and no report shall be made under Article 143 save accordance with an opinion also delivered in open court”. The petitioner also quoted the judgement Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar and Ors vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr., 1966, whi
Read more
Image
 DIGITAL TAX IN INDIA Until date, non-resident businesses doing business in India and having commercial relationships in India were exempt from the Indian tax system due to the taxing regulations outlined in Article 7 of the Double Tax Avoidance Agreement. There was no such provision that allowed the Indian government to collect taxes from abroad corporations that did not have a permanent establishment in India due to taxing restrictions outlined in Article 7 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement. According to the DTAA, a corporation will be subject to Indian taxation only if it has a permanent establishment in India. The Central Board of Direct Taxes introduced the “Threshold for the Purpose of Significant Economic Presence” under Income Tax Rules, 2021 on May 3, 2021, by Notification No. 41 /2021/ F. No. 370142/11/2018-TPL. Companies who have no physical presence in India but have reaped considerable financial benefits from the Indian market will now be subject to the Indian t
Read more

Bilkis Bano Case

                                                                      This article was written by Deepika , Legal Associate at 24x7Nyaya and edited by Abhishek . Introduction: - This incident took place during the 2002 Godhra riots. The event happened after the Sabarmati Massacre, which took the lives of roughly 60 Hindus. They rode the Sabarmati railway, which carried them. They had a pilgrimage planned. When the train was in the Godhra district, it was set on fire. Hindu rioters rampaged throughout this tragedy. They were attributing the tragedy to Muslims. They attacked every Muslim living there and in nearby areas. This case is about a girl named Bilkis Bano, who belonged to the Muslim community. She attempted to flee with her family at the moment she was gang raped. When she was raped, she was five months pregnant. She was not only sexually assaulted by the mob, but nearly every member of her family was also slaughtered.   History of case: - There were riots between
Read more