Madras High Court says Muslim women can be granted interim maintenance under CPC

The Madras High Court has held that a Muslim woman who has filed for divorce under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act 1939, is entitled to receive interim maintenance pending the disposal of her divorce petition..In an order passed on September 2, Justice V Lakshminarayanan said that though the 1939 Act does not have a provision for granting interim maintenance, courts can invoke Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) to grant such maintenance.Justice Lakshminarayanan added that a court cannot shut its eyes when a woman claims she has no means of sustaining herself.The Court also refused to accept the opposing counsel’s argument that Section 151 cannot be invoked to pay interim maintenance since it provided only procedural relief and not any substantive relief..The Court opined that if such an interpretation were to be accepted, then the “wife would be thrown to the wolves and would have to run from pillar to post in order to secure a basic right which is the right to live with decency and dignity.”Justice Lakshminarayan further said that the purpose of granting interim maintenance during litigation was to enable a woman to “survive and fight the litigation.”“Grant of maintenance is in a way granting an equal opportunity and making the litigative playing field equal. I am able to visualize the situation, if the litigant is asked to litigate the matter as against taking care of her child, obviously the latter will become more important. If she is provided with sufficient maintenance for herself and her child, then she can concentrate on the litigation. By directing the husband to pay interim maintenance to the wife, I am only levelling the playing field as stated above. I feel, this would ensure a legal system providing an equal opportunity in order to promote justice,” the Court added..The Court was hearing a petition filed by a man challenging the order of a family court in Udhagamandalam granting interim maintenance to his estranged wife.The wife’s counsel had submitted that she had no source of income and was unable to sustain herself. She had said that her estranged husband was a pediatric cardiologist and was making enough money. Therefore, he was capable of paying interim maintenance, the woman’s counsel had argued..Advocates Gopika Nambiyar and Sharath Chandran appeared for the petitioner..[Read Order]