Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Section 23(3) says that while determining the maintenance for all other dependents the courts shall
consider the following points:
1. the net value of the estate after paying all his debts.
2. the provisions, if any, made in the will in favor of the claimants.
3. the degree of the relationship between the two.
4. the reasonable wants of the dependent.
5. the past relations between the deceased and the claimants.
6. claimant's own earnings or other sources of income.
7. the number of dependents claiming under this act.
1. Desertion: It the husband is guilty of deserting the wife without her consent, against wife's
wishes, and without any reasonable cause, the wife is entitled to separate residence. In the
case of Meera vs Sukumar 1994 Mad., it was held that willful neglect of the husband
constitutes desertion.
2. Cruelty: If husband through his actions creates sufficient apprehension in the mind of the wife
that living with the husband is injurious to her then that is cruelty. In the case of Ram Devi vs
Raja Ram 1963 Allahbad, if the husband treats the wife with contempt, resents her presence
and makes her feel unwanted, this is cruelty.
3. If the husband is suffering from a virulent form of leprosy.
4. If the husband has another wife living. In the case of Kalawati vs Ratan 1960 Allahbad, is
has been held that it is not necessary that the second wife is living with the husband but only
that she is alive.
5. If the husband keeps a concubine or habitually resides with one. In the case of Rajathi vs
Ganesan 1999 SC, it was held that keeping or living with a concubine are extreme forms of
adultery.
6. If the husband has ceased to be a Hindu by converting to another religion.
7. For any other reasonable cause. In the case of Kesharbai vs Haribhan 1974 Mah, it was
held that any cause due to which husband's request of restitution of conjugal rights can be
denied could be a good cause for claiming a separate residence as well as maintenance. In the
case of Laxmi vs Maheshwar 1985 Orrisa, it was held that if the husband fails to obey the
order of restitution of conjugal rights, he is liable to pay maintenance and separate residence
Section 18(3) says that a wife is not eligible for separate residence and maintenance if she is
unchaste or has ceased to be a Hindu.
In the case of Dattu vs Tarabai 1985 Bombay, it was held that mere cohabitation does not by itself
terminate the order of maintenance passed under 18(2). It depends on whether the cause of such an
order still exists.
To have almony pendente lite it is not necessary that petitioners should have no income of her or his
own. If the income of the petitioners is found by court to be insufficient to support her/him the court