You are on page 1of 14

FAMILY LAW - I PRESENTATION

Whether wife residing separately


from husband without any reason
can get maintenance under Hindu
Law

Presented By:-
Unnati Arora
Roll No. C-6
INTRODUCTION
 The term “maintenance” has been used in
a wide sense.
 Hindu Adoptions And Maintenance Act,
1956 defines maintenance as “provision
for food, clothing, residence, education,
and medical attendance and treatment.”
 Most systems of law recognize the
obligation of the husband to maintain his
wife so long as marriage subsists and the
wife remains faithful.
 In most system, the obligation exists even
after the dissolution of marriages.
 The obligation of the husband to maintain his
wife begins with marriage.
 However, the wife should be a legally wedded
wife.
 Hindu law- givers did not deny maintenance
even to an unchaste wife, provided she
continued to live with her husband, though in
such case she was entitled to starving
maintenance.
RIGHT TO MAINTENANCE
Wife’s right to maintenance may arise in
the following situations :-

 When the wife lives with her husband

 When the wife lives separate from her


husband
WHEN WIFE LIVES WITH HUSBAND
 In all patriarchal societies, it has been
considered an imperative duty of the wife
to live with her husband and perform all
conjugal rights.
 Side by side with the obligation of the
wife, the husband’s obligation to maintain
his wife begins with marriage.
 The obligation of the husband to maintain
his wife is a personal obligation.
WHEN THE WIFE LIVES APART
A Hindu wife is entitled to maintenance if
she lives separate from her husband for a
justifiable cause.
 Section 18(2) of the Hindu Adoptions and
Maintenance Act, 1956 lays down the
grounds on which wife may live separate
and claim maintenance from her husband.
1. DESERTION
 Desertion as a ground for living separate is
defined by Section 18(2) as “abandoning her
without reasonable cause and without or of
wilfully neglecting her.”
 The distinction between desertion as a ground
for living separately and as a ground for
judicial separation or divorce under Sections
10 & 13, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is that
under the latter, desertion must be at least for
two years duration. While under the former, it
may be of any duration.
2. CRUELTY
 Clause (b) of Section 18(2), Hindu
Adoptions and Maintenance Act, gives
same definition to cruelty as is given to it
by Section 13(1), Hindu Marriage Act,
1955
 In Kamla Rai vs. Rathuvelu, the
husband by his conduct made it evidently
clear that she was not wanted in the
house and her presence was resented by
him. It was held that this amounted to
cruelty and justified wife’s living separate.
3. LEPROSY
 Clause (c) of section 18(2) runs: “if he
suffering from virulent form of leprosy”.
 Leprosy as a ground for separate
residence may be of any duration, no
period is prescribed, but it must be
existing at the time when the claim for
separate residence and maintenance is
made.
4. ANOTHER WIFE IS LIVING
 Clause (d) of Section 18(2) runs: “If he has
any other wife living”.
 This clause has come for interpretation in
a number of cases.
 It should be noted that any wife can claim
separate residence and maintenance
provided one more wife is living at the
time when claim is made.
5. KEEPS A CONCUBINE
 Clause (e) of Section 18(2) : “ If he keeps a
concubine in the same house in which his wife
is living or habitually resides with concubine
elsewhere.”
 “Keeping a concubine” or “living with a
concubine”, are extreme forms of “living in
adultery”.
 In either case, the wife is entitled to live
separately and claim maintenance from her
husband.
6. CONVERSION
 Clause (f) of Section 18(2) runs: “if he has ceased
to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.”

7. any other justifiable cause


 Clause (g) is a residue clause. It is submitted that
this clause will mean the same thing as
“reasonable cause” under Section 13(1) of Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 and “reasonable excuse” under
Section 9(1) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
CASE LAWS
 K.Sivarama vs K.Bharathi (1985)
In this case, the court held that any marriage in
contravention of Section 5 & 11 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, cannot be considered to be the valid marriage.
Such a woman cannot recourse maintenance U/S. 25 of
the Hindu Marriage Act for claiming maintenance.
 Dattu v. Tarabai (1985)
In this case, the court observed that by mere
presumption of cohabitation, the order of maintenance
passed under Section 18(2) does not terminate. So long
as the basis of separate living is not extinguished, she
will be entitled to live separate and claim
maintenance.
THANK YOU