Woman Who Knew Partner Was a Divorcee Denied Maintenance After Failing to Verify Appeal

Maintenance claimed by a highly educated woman who married a man knowing he had obtained a divorce decree while an appeal and stay remained pending

The petitioner held a PhD in Kannada Philosophy and had worked as a lecturer. She also failed to prove that the respondent forced her to resign. The record contained no case that he concealed the pending matrimonial appeal.

Issue and applicable law

The central question was maintenance claimed by a highly educated woman who married a man knowing he had obtained a divorce decree while an appeal and stay remained pending.

The Court distinguished Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse and Monika v. State of U.P., where husbands had fraudulently hidden subsisting first marriages. The claim arose under Section 125 CrPC; Section 144 BNSS is the current corresponding provision for later proceedings.

Court's reasoning

The Court held that she could not claim maintenance because the first marriage legally subsisted and she failed to prove fraudulent concealment of the appeal or stay. Its principal reason was that a diligent person aware of the earlier marriage and divorce would verify finality, while her pleadings and evidence alleged no suppression by the respondent.

Decision and practical effect

The High Court dismissed her revision against the Family Court's refusal of maintenance.

The ruling is significant because it clarifies how the stated legal standard should be applied to comparable disputes without extending the decision beyond the facts reported by the source.

Case details

• Case: A v. S
• Court: Karnataka High Court
• Case number or citation: Revision Petition Family Court No. 100123 of 2025
• Judges: Justice Geetha K.B.
• Source: https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/karnataka-high-court/karnataka-high-court-woman-marrying-divorcee-claim-maintenance-verify-finality-divorce-decree-548975