Settlement for waiving maintenance claim not to bar maintenance under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956

A recent ruling of the Supreme Court (“Nagendrappa Natikar Vs. Neelamma”), which is both cautionary and remedial in nature, has opined that giving up future claim for maintenance (“by a compromise settlement”) and the fact of it being accepted by the court under Section 125 of CrPC, would not preclude a wife from claiming maintenance Section 18 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The main reason behind this is the tentative nature of the maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC. In this short judgment, Court held that:

“Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a piece of social legislation which provides for a summary and speedy relief by way of maintenance to a wife who is unable to maintain herself and her children. Section 125 is not intended to provide for a full and final determination of the status and personal rights of parties, which is in the nature of a civil proceeding, though are governed by the provisions of the Cr.P.C. and the order made under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is tentative and is subject to final determination of the rights in a civil court.”

“Section 25 of the Contract Act provides that any agreement which is opposed to public policy is not enforceable in a Court of Law and such an agreement is void, since the object is unlawful. Proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is summary in nature and intended to provide a speedy remedy to the wife and any order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by compromise or otherwise cannot foreclose the remedy available to a wife under Section 18(2) of the Act.”

Note: Under Indian Contract Act, 1872, Section 23 & 24 provides for the "unlawful". However, Court, in this judgment, has referred to Section 25 of the Act which provides for an agreement to be void if it is without consideration. Click here for the judgment