The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with a Family Court order directing a husband to pay monthly maintenance to his wife, holding that the issue of their marriage had already been conclusively settled in earlier proceedings.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee dismissed the revision petition challenging the maintenance order, finding no material illegality or irregularity warranting interference.
Background Of The Case
The parties married in Delhi on May 20, 2002. Their matrimonial relationship deteriorated soon after, and the wife left the matrimonial home in August 2002.
In 2003, the husband filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that he was unmarried and an injunction preventing the woman from claiming to be his wife. Although the suit was initially decreed in his favour, the decision was reversed in appeal in 2006. The subsequent second appeal before the High Court was also dismissed in 2011.
Meanwhile, the wife had sought maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Family Court directed payment of maintenance at different rates, including Rs.7,000 per month initially and Rs.10,000 per month from January 2012 onwards, along with Rs.11,000 towards litigation expenses.
Court's Observation
The husband argued that the woman could not claim maintenance as his legally wedded wife and also contended that she was capable of supporting herself.
The High Court, however, noted that the question of marriage had already been decided in the earlier civil proceedings and had attained finality.
The Court observed:
“The petitioner cannot seek to escape the outcome thereof by, once again, de novo contending the very same decided issues in another/ fresh proceeding at a later stage.”
The Court further held that the husband had not produced evidence sufficient to establish his case and could not use the revision proceedings to reopen an issue that had already been settled.
Decision
The High Court held that the wife fell within the scope of Section 125 CrPC and that the husband had a legal obligation to maintain her. It also found no reason to interfere with the amount of maintenance fixed by the Family Court.
Accordingly, the Delhi High Court dismissed the revision petition along with the pending applications.
Case Details
- Case Title: A vs. M
- Case Number: CRL.REV.P. 1019/2018
- Judge: Justice Saurabh Banerjee
- Decision Date: August 31, 2026
