List of Current Affairs

Source: Kerala High Court

Why in News?

Recently Kerala High Court in matter of Shilpa v K K Rajeevan the court emphasized that when Magistrates issue maintenance orders under Section 20(1)(d) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005 (DV Act) they must clearly specify whether the maintenance is granted under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (CrPC) or Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA).

What was the Background of Shilpa v. K K Rajeevan ?

• The father (Respondent) and daughter (Petitioner) both are Hindus.
• At the age of 14, the daughter petitioned to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence) Court in Ernakulam for maintenance.
  • Under Section 20 (1) (d) of the DV Act, Magistrate has power to order the father to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 2000 to the daughter.
• When the daughter attended the majority, the respondent filed a petition to exempt himself from paying maintenance, citing her adulthood and income from employment abroad.
• The daughter argued she was entitled to maintenance as she was unmarried and without income.
• In 2015, the Magistrate granted the father's petition and exempted him from paying maintenance to the adult daughter.
• The daughter appealed this decision in the Kerala High Court.
• During the pendency of the revision petition in 2017, the daughter married.
• The Revision Petition now focuses on determining the daughter's entitlement to maintenance from 2015 until her marriage in 2017.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice P G Ajithkumar addressed the necessity for Magistrates to clearly specify whether maintenance orders are issued under Section 125 CrPC or Section 20(3) HAMA.
• The High Court clarified that maintenance under the DV Act could be ordered under either Section 125 of CrPC or Section 20(3) of HAMA, each entailing different conditions and durations.
  • It emphasized that if maintenance were ordered under Section 20(3) of HAMA, the obligation continued until the daughter's marriage or until she became self-sufficient.
  • Exemption from such maintenance required the father to prove the daughter's disqualification.
• The Court highlighted that under Section 125 CrPC, maintenance ceases upon the daughter attaining majority unless she suffers from a physical or mental condition preventing self-sufficiency.
  • It underscored the secular application of Section 125 CrPC, available to all irrespective of religion.

What is the DV Act?

About:

• It is a social beneficial legislation enacted to protect women from domestic violence of all kinds.
• It was brought into force on 26^th October 2006.
• It provides for effective protection of the rights of women who are victims of violence of any kind occurring within the family.
• The preamble of this Act makes it clear that the reach of the Act is that violence, whether physical, sexual, verbal, emotional or economic, are all to be redressed by the statute

What is Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005?

• Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act empowers the court to issue orders for monetary relief aimed at covering expenses and losses incurred by the aggrieved person and any children due to domestic violence.
• This relief may encompass expenses associated with medical treatment, loss of earnings, damage to property, and other consequential costs arising from the violence.
• Section 20(1)(d) state that the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any, including an order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force.

What is Section 125 of CrPC ?

About

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) provides that any person who has sufficient means to maintain himself cannot deny to maintain his wife, children and parents if they are not able to maintain themselves.
• The provisions of maintenance of the Criminal Procedure Code,1973 are applicable to persons belonging to all religions and have no relationship with the personal laws of the parties.

Maintenance to Child

• Section 125(1)(b) provides for maintenance to a child unable to maintain itself. The child here can be legitimate or illegitimate, whether married or not.
• Section 125 (1)(c) provides for maintenance to legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority but due to physical or mental abnormality or injury is unable maintain itself.
• The magistrate, on proof of neglect or refusal to maintain the child, passes an order to pay monthly allowance at such fixed rate as it deems fit to be paid from time to time and to such person as the magistrate directs.
• However, the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in Section 125(1)(b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means.
• Here 'minor' means a person who, under the provisions of the Indian Majority Act, 1875 is deemed not to have attained his majority.
• A Muslim minor girl would be entitled to get maintenance from her father even after the enforcement of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
• The word child is not defined in the code. It means a male or female person who has not reached full age, i.e., 18 years as prescribed by the Indian Majority Act, 1875 and who is incompetent to enter into any contract or to enforce any claim under the law.

What is the Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA)?

• Section 20 of HAMA deals with Maintenance of children and aged parents.
• Section 20 provides that Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents.
• Section 20(3) state that the obligation of a person to maintain his or her aged or infirm parent or a daughter who is unmarried extends in so far as the parent or the unmarried daughter, as the case may be, is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property.

Case Law

• Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat (2005):
  • The Supreme Court held that Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been enacted in the interest of a wife and one who wants to take the benefit under sub-section (1)(a) of Section 125 has to establish that she is the wife of the person concerned.
• Sh Jagmohan kashyap v. Govt. of Nct of Delhi & Anr.(2022):
  • The Delhi High Court has observed that the right to claim maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure are not mutually exclusive.

Source: Telangana High Court

Why in News?

Recent ruling by the Telangana High Court in the matter of Malabai Khandarkar v. Y. Jaihind Reddy and others has attracted considerable attention on procedural rules for appeals, substantive rights under Specific Relief Act, and whether non-parties can appeal based on demonstrated prejudice to their interests.

• The court's decision affirms the right of non-parties to file appeals under Sections 96-100 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (CPC), particularly when they are adversely affected by a trial court's decision.

What was the Background of Malabai Khandarkar v. Y. Jaihind Reddy and others?

• The dispute revolves around a specific performance lawsuit filed by the respondent (Y. Jaihind Reddy and others) for enforcement of a sale deed for a disputed property.
• The trial court ruled in favor of the respondent, ordering sellers to execute the sale deed.
• Appellants, (Malabai Khandarkar) who claim prior purchase rights from same sellers, were aggrieved as trial court's decision threatened their ownership rights.
• Appellants sought permission from Telangana High Court to appeal, despite not being formal parties to the original suit.
• Telangana High Court analyzed Sections 96-100 of CPC governing appeals, and Order I Rule 10(2) allowing addition of necessary parties.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Telangana High Court, in a landmark decision, affirmed that non-parties can appeal under Sections 96-100 of the CPC if they show they are adversely affected by a trial court's judgment.
• The court emphasized that it would be unjust to deny such individuals the right to appeal solely because they were not originally parties to the suit.
• The ruling stressed that anyone substantially affected by a judgment, regardless of their formal status in the original suit, can seek leave to appeal.
• The Courts interpretation aligns with the procedural framework of the CPC, which allows appeals from original decrees without distinguishing between parties and non-parties.
• The court also recognized the appellants' status as subsequent purchasers, noting their relevance as proper and necessary parties in the case.

What is Appeal Under Code of Civil Procedure,1908?

• Anyone aggrieved by a decree or order of a court has the right to appeal to a higher court, provided such appeal is allowed against that decree or order.
• An appeal involves the judicial review of a lower court's decision by a higher court, aiming to assess the correctness and legality of the lower court's ruling.
• The purpose of an appeal is to transfer a case from a lower court to a higher court to scrutinize the validity of the lower court's decision.
• In cases where an original jurisdiction court issues a decree, the first appeal typically lies with the appellate court authorized to hear appeals from decisions of that specific court.
• Exceptions to this rule may exist if expressly provided by the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) or any other applicable law.
• Section 96, 100,104 and 109 of CPC confer the right of appeal.

What is the First Appeal Under Code of Civil Procedure,1908?

• Sections 96 to 99-A, 107 read with Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure deal with first appeal.
• The first appeal lies against a decree passed by a court exercising original jurisdiction.
• The first appeal can be filed in a superior court which may or may not be a High Court.
• A first appeal is maintainable on a question of fact, or on a question of law, or on a mixed question of fact and law.

What are the Legal Provisions Deals with First Appeal under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908?

• Section 96 of CPC deals with appeal from original decree.
  • It states that where otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie from every decree passed by any Court exercising original jurisdiction to the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decisions of such Court.
    • An appeal may lie from an original decree passed ex parte.
    • No appeal shall arise from a decree passed by the Court with the consent of the parties.
    • No appeal shall lie, except on a question of law, from a decree in any suit of the nature cognizable by Courts of Small Causes, when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit does not exceed ten thousand rupees.
• Section 97 deals with appeals from the final decree where no appeal from the preliminary decree.
  • It states that where any party aggrieved by a preliminary decree passed after the commencement of this Code does not appeal from such decree, he shall be precluded from disputing its correctness in any appeal which may be preferred from the final decree.
• Section 98 deals with the decision where an appeal is heard by two or more Judges.
  • When an appeal is heard by two or more judges, the decision will be based on the opinion of the majority of those judges.
  • If there is no majority decision that agrees on varying or reversing the appealed decree, the original decree stands confirmed.
  • In cases where the Bench has an even number of judges and they disagree on a legal point, they can refer that specific point to other judges of the court. The decision on that point will be based on the majority opinion of all the judges involved in hearing the appeal.
  • This section does not affect any provisions specified in the letters patent of any High Court
• Section 99 deals with no decree to be reversed or modified for error or irregularity not affecting merits or jurisdiction.
  • It states that no decree shall be reversed or substantially varied, nor shall any case be remanded, in appeal on account of any misjoinder or non-joinder of parties or causes of action or any error, defect or irregularity in any proceedings in the suit, not affecting the merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the Court
  • Section 99A deals with no order under section 47 to be reversed or modified unless the decision of the case is prejudicially affected.
  • It states that Without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of Section 99, no order under Section 47 shall be reversed or substantially varied, on account of any error, defect or irregularity in any proceeding relating to such order, unless such error, defect or irregularity has prejudicially affected the decision of the case.

Case Law

• Baldev Singh v. Surinder Mohan Sharma, (2003):
  • The Supreme court stated that there is no dispute that as against a decree, an appeal would be maintainable in terms of Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
  • Such an appeal, however, would be maintainable only at the instance of a person aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree.