Men Rights India

  • Contact
  • Bare Acts
    • IPC 498A bare act
    • CrPC 125 Bare Act
    • The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – bare act
    • Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Bare Act
  • 498a
    • 498a Tips
    • 498a Info
    • 498a Judgments
  • DV Act
    • DV Act Tips
    • DV Act Info
    • DV Act Judgments
  • Maintenance
    • Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
    • Maintenance HMA 24 Judgments
  • Child Custody
    • Child Custody Visitation Judgments
    • Child Custody Visitation News
  • Misc
    • Divorce Judgments
    • Law Misuse
    • Marriage
    • Misandry
    • Sexual Harassment
    • Important Posts
You are here: Home » DV Act Judgments » Delhi sessions court denies woman maintenance under DV Act on grounds that she was capable of working and without child

Delhi sessions court denies woman maintenance under DV Act on grounds that she was capable of working and without child

21 Mar 2015 By videv 8 Comments

This is a Mar 2014 judgment of Delhi sessions court which had denied maintenance to wife under DV Act, and it seems very important for any husband facing maintenance case whose wife worked at some point of time even if before marriage.   One of the most common scenarios we hear from men is that “wife was working before marriage, but left job after marriage, and has now filed maintenance case on me”.  Or a less common scenario: “wife was working after marriage also, but left the house, then filed maintenance case saying she doesn’t have a job”.

👉(Read Online eBook): How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125 and DV Act 👈

👉(Read Online eBook): Alimony and Maintenance under Hindu Law👈

Main thing I find is woman herself acknowledged she used to run a business before marriage.  Which is why past working status is the most crucial part of evidence husband needs to collect if the woman denies that she is currently working.

Important parts of (a short) judgment below:


6. The appellant in her complaint before the trial court stated that she was doing the small business of fashion designer in the name of M/s She Fab Expose in Delhi. There is an admission on part of the appellant that she was working and thus is capable of working. It is not pleaded as to how her marriage has rendered her incapable of continuing the work which she was doing prior to her marriage. The couple does not have any child and therefore the appellant is as independent as the respondent to work and maintain herself.

In 171 (2010) DLT 644, Sanjay Bhardwaj & Ors. Vs. State the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that where the parties have equal educational qualification, both must take care of themselves and dismissed the revision of the wife.

Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Crl. Revision Petition No. 344/11 dated 14/09/12, Damanreet Kaur Vs. Indermeet Juneja also dismissed the petition of the wife holding that she was capable to work.

7. In view of the judgments the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi where it has been held that wherever the wife is capable to work and had been working, she shall not be considered dependent upon the husband for her survival, there is no apparent error in the order of Ld. Trial Court.

8. In view of above the appeal is dismissed.


Full judgment text below:


    IN THE COURT OF MS. ANURADHA SHUKLA BHARDWAJ

         ASJ­02 (EAST) KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI

CA No.  135/13
Shilpa Gupta
W/o Shailesh Gupta

D/o Sh. Suresh Maheshwari
at Flat No. 202, Plot  No. 383/12,

West Guru Angad Nagar,
Gurudwara Road,

Laxmi Nagar,
Delhi­110092

                                         ………….Appellant

   Versus

Shailesh Gupta
S/o Late Sh. Bal Kishan Bansal

R/o 4694/21A, II Floor,
Ansari Road, Daryaganj,
New Delhi

                                        ………… Respondent

ORDER

1.               The revision was filed u/s 397 of Cr.P.C. challenging the

   order of Ld. Trial Court passed in a complaint u/s 12 of Domestic

   Violence Act.

2.        Ld. Counsel for the respondent took a preliminary objection

   that the revision was not maintainable in its given form as appeal u/s

   29 of D.V. Act and not revision u/s 397  Cr.P.C. is maintainable

READ:  All women in household deserve protection under PWDVA

   against the impugned order.

3.        Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has filed the amended memo

   along with amended cause title with the request to treat the petition

   as an appeal u/s 29 of DV Act,  since the contents and prayer

   remains the same. The petition shall be teated as an appeal u/s 29

   of D.V. Act.

4.         On merit it was argued that the appellant, who was married to

   the   respondent,     is   dependent   for   her   livelihood   upon   the

   respondent. Ld. Trial Court has committed an error in concluding that

   she is capable to work and so cannot be granted maintenance.  It is

   argued that it cannot be decided at a prima facie stage as to whether

   the petitioner  is capable of  working or not and that appellant not

   doing any work at present, shall be presumed to be dependent upon

   the husband. Ld. Counsel for the respondent on the other hand

   argued that as per her own admission the appellant was working

   before  her marriage. It was argued that she is an independent

   woman and can maintain herself.

5.        Argument heard. Record Perused.

6.        The  appellant in her complaint before  the trial court stated

   that  she was doing the small business of fashion designer in the

   name of M/s She Fab Expose in Delhi. There is an admission on part

   of the appellant that she was working and thus is   capable of

   working.  It is not pleaded as to how her marriage has rendered her

   incapable of continuing the work which she was doing prior to her

   marriage.  The couple does not have any child and therefore the

   appellant is as independent as the respondent to work and maintain

   herself.

           In 171 (2010) DLT  644, Sanjay Bhardwaj & Ors. Vs. State

   the Hon’ble  Delhi High Court  has held that where the parties have

   equal educational qualification, both must take care of themselves

   and dismissed the revision of the wife.

            Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Crl. Revision Petition No.

   344/11  dated 14/09/12, Damanreet Kaur Vs. Indermeet Juneja

   also dismissed the petition of the wife holding that she was capable

   to work.

7.               In view of the  judgments the Hon’ble  High Court of

   Delhi  where it has  been held that wherever the wife is  capable to

   work and had been working, she shall not be considered dependent

   upon the husband for her survival,  there is no apparent error in the

   order of Ld. Trial Court.

8.        In view of above the appeal is dismissed.  TCR be sent back

   along with copy of order. Appeal file be consigned to Record  Room.

   Announced in the open
   court on 18/03/14                (ANURADHA SHUKLA BHARDWAJ)
                                  ASJ­02, (EAST) KKD COURTS/DELHI

Links to Free eBooks

1. Download my free PDF eBook Surviving the Legal Jungle

2. Read this FREE eBook written by fathers involved in child custody issues (Read Online) (PDF book)

3. How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125 and DV Act (Read Online)

Links to Paid eBooks/Books


1. How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125 and DV Act (Digital eBook) (Print Paperback)

2. Self-study Book on Divorce for Men (Digital eBook Only)

3. Alimony and Maintenance under Hindu Law (Digital eBook) (Print Paperback)

Related Posts

No related posts.

Filed Under: DV Act Judgments

Comments

  1. S N Santra says

    October 15, 2015 at 10:40 pm

    I am a retired employees of 67 years old with monthly income of only 1252.00 pension and superannuation benefit of Rs.7747. My wife has left my house during my absence without my consent, wish and knowledge with the wife of her maternal uncle. She has filed a case for maintenance under section 125 cr.pc. She has confessed in her witness that she used to teach little children at my house, get medical treatment facilities from me and my office for herself and our children, go together with husband to attend programme of Ladies Club in which she was a member. She also said in her oral witness that I used to give school expenses of our children, behave properly with her, took information about her and provided maintenance to her. She has said in the court that she is not willing to come back to my house. I met her 20 times at her father’s house and have given maintenance allowance in cash, requested her to come back in person, in letter and in a cancellation meeting in presence of Ld Advocates of both the parties. I have submitted two dairies written by my wife in the court as exhibits. In these dairies she wrote that she was not willing to marry me because many persons loved her, wanted to marry her but her parents did not give her marriage to any of them for their own interest. She has deserted me four times and on previous two occasion she wrote me letter stating her confession and commitment to come back and live with me peacefully. She also confessed that I have tried to bring her back, give her financial security but failed because she has not come back and misunderstand me. Our only son died at the age of 17 and only daughter left my house and married according to her choice though I met her and her lover and wanted to give their marriage but they did not give me that opportunity. Her father had also given a written commitment that on the basis of miscommunication of their daughter they could not treated their son-in-law i.e. me properly and they have taken their daughter to their house and kept there for more than five months. My son .e. their grand son has gone to their house many times to bring his mother back home but failed.
    I used to give my salary to my wife who used to spend for maintaining the family affairs including gift etc and used to write the entire expenditure in dairies. I have arranged for her pension and medical treatment by my Office even after my death. My son went to bring her back last and fell ill there at her father’s house. She did not inform me, provide him proper care, medicine and treatment from a registered medical practitioner nor bring him to my Company hospital where free medical treatment is given. She retained him there for 3 days under the treatment of Quack doctor and after 3 days brought to our hospital at a very worst condition and hence he could not be saved despite best treatment from reputed doctors.
    Kindly advise how I could fight this case?

    Reply
    • videv says

      October 16, 2015 at 11:25 am

      How to fight maintenance cases is already there on this website in many posts/judgments, and I even wrote a whole book on the topic. So you can refer to them. You will have to decide whether to focus on bringing wife back (favourite suggestion of lawyers), or instead prove there is no neglect, no maintenance can be given, and let her stay wherever she wants to.

      Reply
  2. Prof.B.Krishna says

    August 23, 2015 at 7:59 am

    Let the modern trend be against purity of married life. But, it is the fact that, married life signifies purity of sex. Either arranged marriage or a love marriage, is a marriage in its truer sense. Marriage is are made in heaven; marriage is for the whole life, and even its relation continues for ever even after this life.

    Let the husband or wife be bad, no matter, they are husband and wife for ever, the pains of married life must be endured by both with out grumbling. Pains are incidental, and vanishes after few minutes/ hours/ days/ months/ years. Waiting for the happy time with utmost tolerance, with the moral support of all the family members, both elders and youngers, relatives and friends, and even neighbours.

    If husband or wife, due to unhappy incident, thinks of go away from each other, it is like “jumping from a frying pan to a forest fire, to be burnt out”.

    For any family disturbing issues, the solution is not at all divorce, which is the greatest tsunami like catastrophe in Hindu or Any married life, on this globe.

    For the timely good or bad, the judiciary should protect both husband and wife from not going away for ever through divorce, and thus destroying the most significant family life from this earth ( See Confucius Philosophy of Family Life).

    In any nation and time, in the married life, it is male dominant family life, so, till today, Govt. of India could not pass the Women Right Bill. Hence, It is binding to husband to take care of his wife, in all her welfare aspect, at the time of their living together and their living apart, without divorce.

    The divorce based family courts must and should be abolished from India, for ever and ever, since, it is destroying the purity of the social life and thus destroying families for ever and ever.

    Every judges, must and should, dismiss the divorce petitions, mercilessly, in order to save families from forest fire. Let them be burning in hot pans, which lost for few hours/ days only. Family pains are passing lightnings, thunders and rains.

    Let us all together, live to protect the sacred and heavenly family life.

    Best Wishes to one and all who will determine to save the family life.

    Namaste

    Prof.B.Krishna.

    Reply
  3. Mohammed Shakeel says

    May 20, 2015 at 2:33 pm

    I am facing this problem in my marriage also, very harsh law against men but luckily Court is recognizing fake cases and taking good steps.

    Reply
  4. v.puri says

    May 15, 2015 at 12:00 am

    God save the men in india with such female oriented laws. The only saving grace being that the judiciary has started recognising these extortion rackets.

    Reply
  5. Harassed Husband says

    May 12, 2015 at 12:34 pm

    can the judgements of sessions court be submitted, which have jurisdiction local to the specific session’s court ?

    Reply
    • videv says

      May 16, 2015 at 4:01 pm

      Not sure. Lawyer not helping with it?

      Reply
  6. Rajbir Singh says

    March 24, 2015 at 9:12 am

    It’s good not to have a men dominated world. But their should be no women dominated world either. At least our judges have started addressing this fact.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Call Men Rights India numbers For 498A/406/Dowry Case/DV/Maintenance/child custody-visitation/abusive-wife/false cases, CALL volunteers' phone lines (for quick guidance only):
(Be respectful to volunteers, & we don't advise on divorce)

1. Kannada/Hindi/English: +919738010456
2. Tamil/English: +919962514226

Join our WhatsApp/Facebook groups for FREE guidance/discussion

Join Our Telegram Channel for FREE updates

Social

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Instagram

Search this website

Important/Must Read/Permanent Posts

  • How to assess your false case and marriage breakup probability
  • How to take action against police or magistrate for 498A arrest without following CrPC 41 41A?
  • Why Indian men should be very careful in filing divorce
  • What to do if CAW cell/police/advocate is putting pressure to compromise
  • Innocent until proven guilty is the law, use it!
  • Advice to men on 498a, maintenance, DV, divorce, child custody, what else
  • How to find and manage your lawyer in 498a, DV, CrPC 125, divorce, RCR cases
  • How to fight false cases of DV, Maintenance, CrPC 125, 498a etc
  • How to assess maintenance amount likely to be ordered in CrPC 125 or HMA 24
  • Notes and questions on court procedures
  • What should be my stand in court?
  • Understanding the divorce industry in India

Book: How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125 and DV Act


👉(Read Online eBook)👈
(Buy Print book)
(Buy Digital eBook)
(Information about the Book)

Today’s Popular Posts

  • How to file objections/written statement to…
  • How to complain against judges of trial courts, High…
  • Advice to women on IPC 498a, DV case, maintenance,…
  • Procedure of CAW (Crime against women) cell
  • Section 41, 41A, 41B of CrPC which govern arrest by…
  • Why Indian men should be very careful in filing divorce
  • Basic Cross-examination techniques in matrimonial…
  • How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125…
  • How to draft a child custody (GWC) petition
  • Strategy for Child Custody for Men

Tags

498A Activism Arrest Child Support Child_Custody_Visitation Commando Gyan Commando Strategy Commando Techniques CrPC CrPC 125 Cruelty Divorce Domestic Violence Industry Dowry DV Act Judgments Evidence False Case False Rape Family Law Feminazis Feminist Figures Feminist Propaganda Fight Back HC Judgment Hindu Marriage Act HMA 24 Law Making Law Misuse Laws Legal Info live-in Maintenance Marriage Men Rights NCW NRI Police Press Release PWDVA(DV Act) Rape RTI SC Judgment Supreme Court WCD Women Reservation Bill

The Benefits of Reading Men Rights India!

before reading MRI
Before


after reading MRI
After

email: I am facing false DV case. I love your blog. It really have me boost to fight this case and I feel so happy that you guys are doing such a commendable work.


comment: Your survey is 100 % true. whatever is written in this blog matches more than 90 % of my marriage life situation.


comment: The Article is really great, it’s actually happening in my life. whatever is mentioned here is the tactics are used by my wife and still going on….


comment: This is a very good article, and some points mentioned here are the real reasons males are threatened to shell out the maintenance amount


comment: This document is very help for me,becoise i am sufring for false dowry case and fiting for them.so thank for to u.


comment: The web content is very useful for its diversity and especially for atrocities committed upon men, emitting a clarion call for them to rise and defend their rights and hood.


comment: Thanks you People doing very may allah grant you Success. Ameen.


comment: This is very helpful. Thanks a lot. Your work is really a morale booster..
Search judgments at Bharat Law
Read judgments at Bharat Law
IPC 498A Judgments
IPC 406 Judgments
DV Act Judgments
CrPC 125 Judgments
Child Custody Judgments

Author on Facebook

Vivek Deveshwar

Free eBook: Surviving the Legal Jungle

Surviving-the-Legal-Jungle-Cover-Image

Featured Posts

Notes and questions on court procedures

27 Jan 2015 By videv 51 Comments

Old couple blame misuse of dowry law for losing house

17 Apr 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Saner voices on women representation appearing now

11 Mar 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Multiple maintenance under DV Act denied when CrPC 125 already decided

12 Oct 2014 By videv 3 Comments

i-VAWA is all Woozles

11 Mar 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Equality for Men – Myth or Reality?

Download IMD handbook
Download IMD handbook

Recent Comments

  • videv on How to get Provident Fund (PF) details of wife
  • Raghu on How to get Provident Fund (PF) details of wife
  • videv on How to assess maintenance amount likely to be ordered in CrPC 125 or HMA 24
  • P2 on How to assess maintenance amount likely to be ordered in CrPC 125 or HMA 24
  • Child visitation monitor New Haven on Strategy for Child Custody for Men

RSS Feeds

  • All Posts
  • DV Act Judgments
  • Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
  • 498A Judgments

Archives

Copyright © 2009-2021 · Vivek Deveshwar · Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Bare Acts
    • IPC 498A bare act
    • CrPC 125 Bare Act
    • The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – bare act
    • Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Bare Act
  • 498a
    • 498a Tips
    • 498a Info
    • 498a Judgments
  • DV Act
    • DV Act Tips
    • DV Act Info
    • DV Act Judgments
  • Maintenance
    • Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
    • Maintenance HMA 24 Judgments
  • Child Custody
    • Child Custody Visitation Judgments
    • Child Custody Visitation News
  • Misc
    • Divorce Judgments
    • Law Misuse
    • Marriage
    • Misandry
    • Sexual Harassment
    • Important Posts