Case Note & Summary
The case involved a matrimonial dispute where the wife had sought interim maintenance pendente lite for herself and the children under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Family Court had granted interim maintenance at a rate of approximately Rs.200 per day. Aggrieved by this order, the husband filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the quantum and the granting of maintenance to children under that section. The husband contended that Section 24 does not envisage granting interim maintenance to children and that the amount awarded was excessive. He also clarified that he had no intention to deprive the children of maintenance. The wife opposed the petition, arguing that the Family Court's order contained no error requiring interference. The High Court considered the arguments and evaluated the order under challenge. Taking into account the prevailing cost of living, the court observed that a daily maintenance of Rs.200 could not be regarded as excessive or unreasonable. It further emphasized the limited scope of writ jurisdiction, reiterating the settled principle that the High Court does not exercise its extraordinary power to correct every error of law or fact; such interference is warranted only when a miscarriage of justice is shown. Finding no miscarriage of justice in the present case, the court concluded that the petition was devoid of substance. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed with costs, and the rule was discharged. The decision confirmed the Family Court's interim maintenance order and reaffirmed the restrained approach of writ courts in family law matters unless a clear injustice is demonstrated.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Interim Maintenance - Scope of Writ Interference Against Interim Maintenance Orders - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 24 - The High Court dismissed a husband's writ petition challenging the Family Court's order granting interim maintenance of about Rs.200 per day to the wife and children. The court held that the quantum was not excessive considering the present cost of living, and that writ jurisdiction does not extend to correcting every error of law or fact in the absence of a miscarriage of justice - Held that no miscarriage of justice occurred; petition dismissed with costs (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the interim maintenance order of the Family Court granting Rs.200 per day under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is so excessive and unreasonable as to warrant interference under writ jurisdiction.
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed with costs. Rule discharged. The interim maintenance order of the Family Court is upheld.
Law Points
- interim maintenance pendente lite not to children under Section 24
- writ jurisdiction cannot correct every error
- miscarriage of justice
- quantum of maintenance not excessive
- extraordinary jurisdiction
