Dismissal of divorce plea due to non payment of interim maintenance can be reversed if husband deposits arrears, rules Madras High Court

Madras High Court rules on dismissal of divorce plea for non-payment of maintenance, revival upon arrears settlement.

Family Courts are entitled to dismiss a plea for divorce if the petitioner does not comply with an order to pay interim maintenance to his wife but such dismissal can be reversed and the divorce proceedings can be revived if he comes forward to pay the arrears, the Madras High Court has ruled.

Justice V. Lakshminarayanan agreed with advocate S.P. Arthi that the divorce proceedings initiated by her client must be revived since he had now submitted before the court three demand drafts to the tune of ₹5.6 lakh towards interim maintenance arrears to his wife at the rate of ₹20,000 a month.

Though the counsel for the petitioner’s wife refused to receive the demand drafts, the judge directed the petitioner to deposit them to the credit of the divorce petition before the VI Additional Family Court in Chennai and said, the wife would be entitled to withdraw them any time, if she so desires.

The judge also set aside the Family Court’s July 6, 2024 order, through which the petitioner’s pleadings in the divorce plea were struck off on the sole ground of non adherence to the court order on payment of interim maintenance, and directed the presiding officer to continue the hearing on the divorce plea.

Ms. Arthi brought it to the notice of the judge that her client had originally initiated the divorce proceedings under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 before a Family Court at Jodhpur in Rajasthan in 2006 and obtained an ex-parte decree in 2008.

Subsequently, by virtue of the orders passed by the Supreme Court, his wife’s plea to set aside the ex-parte decree stood transferred to the Family Court in Chennai. The Family Court set aside the decree in 2022 and that order was confirmed by the High Court too in April this year.

Thereafter, the Family Court found that the husband had defaulted in payment of interim maintenace and therefore ordered that his pleadings in the divorce proceedings would be struck off if he does not pay the maintenance arrears within a reasonable time.