The Bombay High Court recently held that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to mahr (lumpsum maintenance amount payable by husband to wife on divorce) from her husband as stipulated under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (MWPA) even if she has remarried.
Single-judge Justice Rajesh Patil observed that Section 3(1)(a) of the MWPA does not contain the word 'remarriage' and hence the protection of that maintenance (or mahr) was unconditional and would apply even after the woman (respondent) remarries."Nowhere does the said Act intend to limit the protection that is due to the former wife on the grounds of the remarriage of the former wife. The essence of the Act is that a divorced woman is entitled to a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance regardless of her remarriage. The fact of divorce between the husband and wife is in itself sufficient for the wife to claim maintenance under section 3(1)(a). Section 3 does not absolve the husband of his duty to make and pay a reasonable and fair," the judge observed in the order.The Court further elaborated that if a condition is added in the Act that 'the husband is absolved of his duty when the wife remarries, then the husband would deliberately await his wife's marriage.
Section 3 defines what is a 'mahr' or dower which is a lumpsum amount that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to.Sub-clause (1)(a) stipulates for a fair and reasonable maintenance that a woman is entitled to get within the iddat period (which is a short 2-3 month period after a marriage ends).The judgment came in response to a revision application filed by a man challenging a maintenance order passed by Magistrate at Chiplun which was subsequently upheld and enhanced by the Sessions Court at Ratnagiri.The couple had gotten married in 2005 and they had a daughter. In 2008, the petitioner divorced the wife and she applied for maintenance under Section 3(1)(a) in 2012.In 2014, the Magistrate granted ₹4,32,000 as lumpsum maintenance to be payable by the petitioner to his former wife in 2 months. The petitioner challenged this order before the sessions court.The sessions court in 2017 dismissed the appeal and enhanced the maintenance amount to ₹9 lakh payable by the petitioner within 2 months. On failure to pay, the amount was to carry interest @8% per year till the amount is completely paid.The petitioner challenged this order before the High Court. He also paid ₹1,50,000 to the respondent in intervals.Meanwhile, the woman remarried in 2018.The petitioner then sought quashing of the sessions court order on the ground that the respondent had remarried.Justice Patil did not agree with this argument and opined that the entitlement to a fair and reasonable provision and maintenance of a divorced wife is crystallised on the date of divorce and is not hampered by the former wife's remarriage.
TAGS: Bombay High Court Mahr Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986
