Posted On by &filed under Delhi High Court, High Court.

Delhi High Court
Shyam Chandra Prasad vs Smt. Rajeshwari Devi on 30 August, 2000
Equivalent citations: I (2001) DMC 480
Author: B Khan
Bench: B Khan


B.A. Khan, J.

1. Petitioner filed a matrimonial petition under Section 13 of the HM Act for a decree of divorce. In that proceedings respondent made an application under Sections 24 and 26 for pendente lite maintenance to her and to the son born out of wedlock, Saurabh Mani on 12.2.1973. Trial Court granted Rs. 600/- p.m. to her and Rs. 400/- p.m. to the minor child. Respondent took execution proceedings No. 29/93 and claimed payment of Rs. 3433/- as arrears of maintenance. But petitioner took objection to this on the plea that pendente lite maintenance was not payable by him to Saurabh after 12.2.1991 when he had become major and had also taken an employment for Rs. 9,000/- a month. Executing Court rejected this plea on the ground he ought to have sought modification of the Trial Court order.

2. It is not disputed that Saurabh was not entitled to pendente lite maintenance after he attained majority on 12.2.1991. Therefore, any arrears computed thereafter are not payable by the petitioner and to that extent Trial Court order becomes unenforceable. The impugned order passed by the Executing Court is set aside to that extent and execution may proceed in case there is any further amount outstanding against petitioner apart from the arrears of maintenance payable to Saurabh Mani after 12.2.1991. Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.180 seconds.