The Allahabad High Court has recently affirmed that a husband’s duty to provide maintenance for his wife persists even after his passing, enabling the widow to seek maintenance from her father-in-law.<\/p>\n
This statement was made by a panel of Justices Arindam Sinha and Satya Veer Singh while rejecting an appeal from a husband who contested a family court’s decision that declined to initiate perjury proceedings against his wife in a maintenance case.<\/p>\n
The court emphasized that it is a well-established principle that a husband is responsible for supporting his wife, particularly in circumstances where they are separated and the wife requests financial assistance. The court elaborated that this duty continues even after the husband’s death, thereby allowing the widow to pursue maintenance from her in-laws.<\/p>\n
The husband had claimed that his wife made multiple misleading statements regarding her maintenance request. He argued that she failed to reveal her status as a working professional, instead portraying herself as a homemaker. Additionally, he contended that she held over Rs 20 lakh in fixed deposits across various banks. When questioned by the court, he indicated that these deposits were made by her father in her favor, as she had claimed in her legal submissions, which were also part of a domestic violence case.<\/p>\n
Consequently, the husband sought to have his appeal acknowledged, arguing that the family court had made errors in fact and law by dismissing his application.<\/p>\n
The Allahabad High Court pointed out that the family court found the husband did not provide any evidence to support his assertion that his wife was employed. The court stated, \u201cThe Family Court has clearly determined that the applicant-appellant failed to present documentation proving that the respondent-wife was employed. She cannot be forced to prove a negative by stating she is not employed,\u201d emphasizing that the responsibility lay with the husband to establish her employment status.<\/p>\n
Regarding the fixed deposits, the court noted that they were established by her father, who is not obligated to provide maintenance once she is married, except under widowhood circumstances. The court also acknowledged the husband’s claim that the respondent had withdrawn funds from the fixed deposits, indicating that only approximately Rs 4 lakhs remained, demonstrating her need for maintenance in the absence of support from the husband.<\/p>\n
The Allahabad High Court concluded that there was insufficient basis for admitting the appeal, as no evidence was presented to confirm that the wife had made false statements in the family court.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Allahabad High Court has recently affirmed that a husband’s duty to provide maintenance for his wife persists even after his passing, enabling the widow to seek maintenance from her father-in-law. This statement was made by a panel of Justices Arindam Sinha and Satya Veer Singh while rejecting an appeal from a husband who contested […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3470,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[40,155],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3471","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-india","category-in-legal"],"yoast_head":"\n