POONGODI & ANR. versus THANGAVEL

POONGODI & ANR. versus THANGAVEL

The first proviso to Section 125(3) CrPC does not extinguish or limit entitlement to arrears of maintenance; it only imposes a restriction on the mode of enforcement for arrears older than one year, but the claimant retains the right to recover arrears through civil remedies.

Parties
Appellant: Poongodi; Respondent: Thangavel
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Order of High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr PC, Recovery of Arrears of Maintenance
Criminal Law Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr PC Recovery of Arrears of Maintenance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Poongodi

Appellant

Thangavel

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Order of High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether first proviso to Section 125(3) CrPC limits entitlement to arrears of maintenance to one year preceding the date of application
  2. 2 Whether order of High Court curtailing arrears to one year prior to application date is valid

Ratio Decidendi

The first proviso to Section 125(3) CrPC does not extinguish or limit entitlement to arrears of maintenance; it only imposes a restriction on the mode of enforcement for arrears older than one year, but the claimant retains the right to recover arrears through civil remedies.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of High Court dated 21.04.2004 set aside
  • Respondent directed to pay entire arrears of maintenance due to appellants from 4.2.1993 within six months