Hon’ble Delhi High Court disposed of Petitions of Huband-Wife, both seeking maintenance from each other, as they agreed to settle inter-se.

Title: Kandula Subramaniam v Krishnakoli Datta, Krishnakoli Datta v Kandula Subramaniam

Decided on: 06th October, 2023

+ MAT.APP. (F.C.) 176/2019, MAT.APP. (F.C.) 70/2020 & CM APPL. 8363/2020


This Judgement is given regarding the hearing of two appeals clubbed together, filed by Huband and Wife, both seeking maintenance from each other. Both the parties, through the guidance of the court settled the dispute inter-se, agreeing upon certain terms and conditions, Hon’ble Delhi High Court directed both the parties to file for a Divorce Petition on the grounds of Mutual Consent.

Facts of the case

In this present case the appellant/husband, Mr. Kandula Subramanium, has filed an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (MAT.APP. (F.C.) No. 176/2019). The appeal seeks to set aside or modify the order that the learned judge of the Family Court, East Delhi, Karkardooma, Delhi, issued on April 29, 2019. This Order relates to HMA No.87/2017, in which Mr. Kandula Subramanium’s two petitions for maintenance from his wife, submitted on August 31, 2017, and February 3, 2015, were denied.

Whereas the appellant/wife, Ms. Krishnakohli Datta, has filed an appeal (MAT.APP. (F.C.) No. 70/2020) according to Sections 28 and 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The appeal aims to set aside the order that the learned judge of the Family Court, East Delhi, Karkardooma, Delhi, made on October 22, 2019. This order, which has to do with HMA No.87/2017, denied Ms. Krishnakohli Datta’s request to increase the child’s maintenance under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Court Judgement and Analysis

After listening to the arguments of the counsels of both the parties, both the parties and the court agreed that they would be mutually and voluntarily settling their disputes, relying upon certain terms.

Following Section 13-B(I) of the Act, 1955, the parties agreed to terminate their marriage by jointly submitting a petition for mutual consent divorce. Within a week of the date of order, they were directed to finish the first motion.

The wife, Ms. Krishnakohli Datta, was directed to withdraw the Divorce Petition (HMA No. 87/2017) that she filed before the Family Court Judge in East Delhi, Karkardooma, pursuant to Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act, 1955. The withdrawal had to be scheduled during the First Motion of MAT.APP.(F.C.) 176/2019 & MAT.APP.(F.C.) 70/2020 statement recording.

Within two weeks of the First Motion’s acceptance, the parties were required to file a joint divorce petition under Section 13B (II) of the Act, 1955 for the Second Motion. They also had to attach an application asking for the required six-month waiting period to be waived.

Within one week following the mutually agreed-upon dissolution of their marriage, each party had to withdraw or settle any additional proceedings, petitions, or complaints involving them that were pending before any court or body.

The Hon’ble court upheld that, Master Siraj, the child, will be under the custody of Ms. Krishnakohli Datta. Subject to the child’s approval and convenience, Mr. Kandula Subramanium shall have the right to communicate with the kid by phone, mobile device, or electronic media.

The court emphasized that the parties must understand that they won’t ask one another for maintenance payments.

The court also directed that Master Siraj, the child, will have all of his or her scholastic and financial needs met exclusively by Ms. Krishnakohli Datta. She won’t ask her husband for any financial assistance.

The court upon obtaining the consent of both parties upheld that all their marital disagreements would be solved through this case and both promised not to file lawsuits or pursue legal action against one another.  However, the parties were left free to pursue legal proceedings regarding their property rights before the relevant court or authority, following the law. Accordingly, both the appeals of Husband and Wife seeking maintenance from each other were settled inter se and the petitions were disposed of.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aditi

Click here to view the judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *