Husband tried to manoeuvre a maintenance proceeding by letting it decided as ex-arte and then getting it restored but the Supreme Court intervened and ensured the payment of arrears to the wife and also declined to give any further protection to the husband from arrest.

A bench of Justice Shantanagoudar and Justice Indu Malhotra has passed the order in case titled DEEPTI SHARMA vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH on 04.04.2019.

The Story started in the Allahabad High Court where wife had filed a petition against the husband in respect of restoration of a ex-parte decided maintenance proceeding which was earlier decided in favour of the wife. For better appreciation of facts, we are also providing a copy of the order of Allahabad High Court.

An application for maintenance giving rise to Case No.878 of 2015 (Smt. Deepti Sharma Vs. Amit Chaudhary & Ors.) came to be decided by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, FTC-I, Agra by his judgment and order dated 26.07.2016 awarding the applicant, Smt. Deepti Sharma-the wife of Sri Amit Chaudhary a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month from the date of application.

The said judgment came about in the absence of the husband as the applicant who appears in person states that her husband would not appear in court. There was thus, no option for the Judge but to proceed ex parte. In doing so he adopted a course of action that was eminently just and passed an order of maintenance. It appears, and, which is the submission of Smt Deepti Sharma also that the husband was using it as a manoeuvre to allow proceedings to go ex parte, end in an ex parte judgment, and, then to have the same set aside so as to put the clock back for the applicant, much to her prejudice. He has succeeded in doing so as the learned Judge, Family Court on the husband's application under Section 126 CrPC has set aside the judgment and order dated 26.07.2016 unconditionally and restored the case to its original file and number.

When the wife approached the High Court with the above situation, the High Court simply passed an order indicating “Looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances the Judge, Family Court, FTC-I, Agra before whom proceedings of Case No.878 of 2015 for maintenance are now pending after the ex parte order has been set aside vide order dated 06.03.2018 shall proceed to decide the same afresh within a period of three months next positively”.

It is then that the wife approached the Supreme Court. Initially, the Court on 24.01.2019 passed an order to the effect which apparently gone in favour of the husband as “Till then, no coercive action be taken against Respondent No. 2– Amit Chaudhary in connection with Case No. 3375 of 2015 titled as “Smt. Deepti Sharma Vs. Amit Chaudhary and Ors.” pending before A.C.J.M. Agra, Uttar Pradesh”.

However, on 26.02.2019, the Supreme Court passed an order in favour of the wife as “As an interim direction, respondent no. 2 shall pay a sum of Rs.10 lakhs to the petitioner on the next date of hearing. Respondent No. 2 also undertakes to deposit the cost before the Trial Court, in the meantime. List the matter on 27.03.2019. Interim order to continue till the next date of hearing”.

Husband given the amount to the wife. Though ultimately the Supreme Court passed a direction similar to the direction of Allahabad High Court for disposal of the case within 3 months, but it ensured that a payment of Rs.10 lakhs which was to tune of the amount of arrears of maintenance is paid by the husband to the wife.

In the context, the Supreme Court also declined the request of husband for further protection by observing "The petitioner submits that the interim order dated 24.01.2019 directing that no coercive action be taken against Respondent No.2 may be extended till further consideration by the Trial Court. Such prayer is rejected. It is however open to the Petitioner to make the appropriate prayer before the concerned Court".