Restitution Of Conjugal Rights: Conjugal Rights Restitution is a legal entitlement that is based on Section 9

of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956. The aggrieved party may apply to the district court for restitution of
conjugal rights if the husband or wife is withdrawn from the other partner's company without valid. In
simple terms, the restitution of conjugal rights is regaining the companionship of a spouse who has
abandoned the relationship for no apparent reason.

When either the husband or wife has withdrawn from the other's society without sufficient justification,
the aggrieved party may petition the district court for restitution of conjugal rights, the court has to
examine if the petition is true and there is no legal reason why the application should not be granted the
restitution of conjugal rights.

The legislature, in its wisdom, has provided a statutory remedy for either spouse to reclaim the company of
the spouse who has left the company without good reason, with the objective of protecting the sanctity
and legality of the institution of marriage.

Essential Ingredients: Refer to Text Book

Petition Filing:

The district court's jurisdiction is asserted whenever a husband or wife is excluded from the other's
company without good reason. For Restitution of Conjugal Rights, the Principal Judge of the Family Court
would be invoked under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Every petition filed under the HMA must be
filed in the Family Court of the original civil jurisdiction where:

1. The marriage was solemnized;

2. The respondent resides;
3. The parties to the marriage last lived together; and
4. If the wife is the petitioner, where she has been residing on the date of filing the petition.

Procedure And Steps For Restitution Of Conjugal Rights:

Step 1: File the Petition;

Step 2: File the Reply;

Step 3: Present the Petitioner's Evidence;

Step 4: Present the Respondent's Evidence;

Step 5: Present the Arguments;

Step 6: Present the Judgment & Decree.

SAROJ RANI Vs. SUDHARSHAN KUMAR CHADHA (AIR 1984 SC 1562)

FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. The appellant, i.e. the wife, was treated badly by the respondent, i.e. the husband after the two
years of marriage and after the birth of second daughter.
 2. Thereafter, the appellant sued for the restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 before the Sub-judge and the decree was passed with the consent of both
parties.
3. After the passing of decree, the appellant claimed that she briefly cohabited with respondent, i.e.
the husband.
4. After the lapse of one year, the respondent sued for divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, before the District Judge on the grounds that there had been no cohabitation taken place
since the decree under section 9 was passed.
5. The District Judge dismissed the Divorce petition by giving reasons that the decree under section 9
was a consent decree.
6. Another appeal filed by the respondent to the High Court and the same, which was referred to the
Chief Justice.
7. The appellant also preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court of India.

LEGAL ISSUES:

1. Whether husband entitled to the decree of Divorce or not?

2. Whether Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act violates Article13, 14 and 21 of the Indian
constitution?

JUDGEMENT:

The apex court dismissed the appeal of the appellant wife by considering the above facts and upheld the
judgment which was passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana of a decree of divorce in favor of the
respondent, i.e. the husband. The apex court also considered their relationship of husband and wife by
stating that which was non-cooperative and therefore appeals of the wife easily dismissed and stand to
affirm the decision. In addition, the apex court directed the respondent, i.e. the husband, to pay the
maintenance of Rs.200 per month to the wife and Rs.300 per month to her daughter until she remarries
and maintains the one living daughter until his marriage.

Maintenance pendente lite

Maintenance pendente lite will be granted under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 when the
court is satisfied that the claimant is not in a position to maintain himself or herself. It depends on the
court, the power to grant maintenance and the cost of the proceedings to the spouse who is unable to
maintain his or her living. Proviso under this Section provides that the application for the payment of
expenses of proceeding and interim maintenance shall be disposed of within the 60 days from the date on
which notice of service is addressed to the party.

In Chitra Lekha v. Ranjit Rai on 30 July, (1977), It has been mentioned that the motive behind this Section
is to provide financial aid to indigent party to maintain himself or herself during the pendency of the
litigation so that the spouse does not need to suffer because of the financial crises.

Landmark case laws where pendente lite was granted

In Gulab Chand v. Sampati Devi on 19 November(1986), the wife applied in the Court and demanded
maintenance from her husband. The Court granted maintenance to the wife as she is unable to maintain
herself and the Court also granted maintenance to her minor children as they are living with her. It was
argued by the respondent that no specific application which states maintenance for children was filed
under Section 26. The Court held that they are entitled to grant maintenance to not only the spouse but
also to the children who are living with her and dependent upon her. The Court granted Rs. 150 for
litigation expenses and Rs. 200 per month as maintenance.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:

According to Section 125 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), a magistrate of the first class has the
authority to order the person to give a monthly allowance to his spouse, old parents, legitimate or
illegitimate child. The application will be registered when the husband denies maintaining his spouse, who
is incapable of maintaining herself. If the husband proposes that he will maintain his wife on the condition
that she has to live with him, but she refuses. Here the magistrate will consider her ground of refusal and
stand by her side. The wife shall not be entitled to demand allowance if she lives in adultery.

Maintenance is awarded to the wife based on the husband’s income or financial capability and other major
factors. Interim maintenance will be granted within sixty days from the date of a notice served to the
respondent. Maintenance claim for all the dependents should be not less than Rs 500 per month but it has
been increased now the magistrate has authority to exercise his power and grant a reasonable amount.

A woman can claim maintenance at the time when she found that her husband has been married to
another woman or he deserted her or he treated her with cruelty or when he changed his religion or
ceased to be a Hindu.

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985), was the most controversial maintenance lawsuit and a
landmark case in India. Shah Bano Begum and her husband married in 1932 and they had three sons and
two daughters out of that wedlock. In 1975, her husband drove her out of their matrimonial home. In
1978, she filed for maintenance under Section 125 of CRPC. She demanded 500 Rs per month as her
husband was a professional lawyer and was able to give her a monthly allowance. Her husband denied it
and said he was paying 200 Rs to her for the past two years. The Supreme Court delivered the judgment in
favour of an aggrieved Muslim woman and said a Muslim woman has an absolute right to maintenance.
The Court held Section 125 applies to every person regardless of gender, race, caste, religion, etc. It ruled
that maintenance money, similar to alimony, would be paid to Shah Bano.

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 entitles the wife as well as husband to claim maintenance
pendente lite after showing that he/she doesn’t have any independent source of income. However, the
husband has to prove his mental or physical disability to satisfy the court that he is incapable of earning
and supporting his living. The court is empowered to award two specific relief, to the party:

Monthly allowance during the proceedings.

 Expenses at the time of proceedings in respect of which relief is granted. Expenses of proceedings
consist of travelling expenses, lawyer’s fees, clerical charges, etc.
  The court cannot deny the grant expenses of proceedings and interim maintenance under this
provision.

Either wife or husband can get this maintenance for their own or their child also. Maintenance will be
granted upon the fact that one party is proving that he/she doesn’t have any source of income for the
basic expenses in daily life.

Special Marriage Act, 1954:

Maintenance pendente lite can also be commenced under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954,
but only the wife can claim maintenance here. She needs to prove the fact that she is indigent.

In Rani Sethi v. Sunil Sethi(2011), Appellant (husband) filed an application that sought maintenance from
his wife as she was running a business of paying guest hotels which means she was independent and
financially stable. The husband was thrown out of the house and gave his belongings to him in court. They
had a 26-year-old unmarried son and a 24-year-old unmarried daughter. The Court held that the
respondent has to pay Rs. 20,000 per month and Rs. 10,000 for litigation expenses and provides a Zen car
for their use.

Hindu Adoptions and Maitenance Act, 1956: See PG: 91 Sec.18 maintenance of wife.

Who can claim maintenance pendente lite: The wife, children, or aged parents who are unable to
maintain their livings can claim maintenance under different provisions of the acts, but the husband is
entitled to claim under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act only. The court has to be satisfied that the
person who is refusing or neglecting to maintain is capable of maintaining the others or has sufficient
means.

Wife:

Wife has the right to claim maintenance from her husband when she is not independent or she is not able
to maintain herself or she has children to feed. She cannot claim maintenance if she is living in adultery or
if she denies living with her husband without any acceptable reason or if they are mutually agreed on
separation.

Children:

A child who is legitimate or illegitimate, whether married or not, can claim maintenance but only when
they are unable to maintain themselves. Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act states that the court will
from time to time pass interim orders for the maintenance and education of the minor children. Even if
they have attained their majority, they can claim maintenance. The married daughter has no right to claim
such maintenance.

In Smt. Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge (1997), the wife was awarded maintenance under Section 24 at
the rate of Rs. 1500 per month appealed against the judgment which she was granted. The husband was a
retired army officer and after that a director in the oil and natural gas commission. The wife filed a case
and stated that the husband has not mentioned the true account of assets and income and she said a
father must maintain his unmarried daughter which is mentioned under the Hindu Adoption &
Maintenance Act, 1956. Here, the Supreme Court held that the wife has a right to claim maintenance
which includes her maintenance and her unmarried daughter’s expenses who is living with her under
Section 24 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.

Aged parents: Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, states that the person who is aged
or infirm or unable to maintain himself or herself can claim maintenance under this Section. The
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 established a legal obligation for the
children and legal heirs to provide maintenance to aged parents. Here, maintenance includes food,
residence, clothing, and medical facilities.

In Dr. (Mrs.) Vijaya Manohar Arbat v. Kashi Rao Rajaram Sawai (1987), the appellant who is a medical
practitioner at Kalyan is the daughter of the respondent, by his first wife who died in 1948 and then he
remarried and he has a son from his second wife. The respondent claimed maintenance from his son and
daughter both as he is unable to maintain himself and his wife. The daughter is married and independent.
His father demanded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500 from his daughter. The Court held that it is an
obligation of a son as well as a daughter to maintain their parents. Section 125 of the Criminal Procedural
Code imposes a duty on son and daughter both and the expression ‘his’ under this Section doesn’t exclude
the parent’s right of claiming maintenance from his daughter.

Husband

Husband can claim maintenance under Section 24 if he proves his inability to earn or he proves that he has
no sufficient means to maintain himself. The burden of proof lies on the husband as he has to satisfy the
magistrate that he cannot support his living, either due to some mental or physical disability, thus, he is
qualified to award maintenance from his wife.

Conclusion

The object of this maxim is to provide financial support or standard life to the person who is unable to
maintain it. When it comes to entitlement and justice, the needy wives are entitled to maintenance under
different statutes, but Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act gives equal rights to both husband and wife to
claim maintenance and other provisions grant the right to the children, wife, and aged parents to claim for
maintenance. The court calls upon the parties to file documents like an income tax return, statement of
accounts, lease deeds, etc. before granting any sum as maintenance will be granted upon the fact that one
party of the proceeding does not have any sufficient source of income. The court can order a monthly
amount or lump sum.

9. Requisites of Valid Adoption: 79 to 83. and effects of Adoption: Page: 86.

10. Explain the developments in Succession law of Hindus after 1986. Page: 137.