HC freezes properties of man for failing to pay maintenance to wife, daughter

The Bombay high court (HC) on Friday restrained a city businessman and his parents from creating any third-party rights in the movable or immovable properties held

The Bombay high court (HC) on Friday restrained a city businessman and his parents from creating any third-party rights in the movable or immovable properties held by them either independently or jointly, as he failed to clean the pending dues of interim maintenance to his estranged wife and minor daughter.

HT Image

The bench of justice Prasanna Varale and justice Milind Jadhav also directed the businessman, owner of an elevator manufacturing firm, to submit an inventory of all the movable and immovable properties belonging to him and his parents.

The directives came on a petition filed by his wife complaining about non-compliance of an order passed by a metropolitan magistrate court on June 30, 2018 directing the businessman to pay monthly interim maintenance of ₹75,000 per month to his minor daughter and ₹1.50 lakh to his wife.

The order was passed by the magistrate on a complaint lodged by the petitioner woman invoking provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

In the petition filed through advocate DP Singh, the woman complained that her husband had not complied with the magisterial order, and as of June 2020, he had not clears arrears of more than ₹44 lakh. Counsel for the petitioner, advocate Amogh Singh, on Friday pointed out that earlier on June 9, another division bench had directed the Andheri-based businessman to clear the arrears by the next date, but he has not complied with the order.

The businessman responded to the petition by pointing out that he has already paid sum of ₹15 lakh to his wife, and he could not pay the balance amount as he himself was facing financial difficulties on account of partial closure of business due to Covid-19 lockdown. He also offered to deposit ₹5 lakh more in his wife’s bank account in a week.

The offer, however, failed to impress the bench, which took note of the reference made by the woman to certain movable and immovable properties held by her husband and his parents in her application under provisions of the Act, and issued the restraining order.

HC has also observed that the non-compliance on part of the businessman may amount to wilful breach of HC order, inviting action for contempt of the court, and has kept the issue pending for future consideration.

The matter will now come up for further hearing after two weeks.