About this topic
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (0:00)
Maintenance under Hindu law is spread across three different sources, and most exam problems on the topic are really asking which remedy (which "door") a particular claimant should use. The topic is best understood relationship by relationship: husband and wife, the widowed daughter-in-law, children and parents, and dependants of a deceased Hindu, followed by how the amount is fixed and how overlapping remedies are handled.
Four people walk into a family court on the same morning, each wanting money to live on:
- A husband who wants maintenance from his wife, who earns far more than he does.
- A woman whose husband says their marriage was void from day one, and who wants support while the court decides.
- A widow who wants maintenance from her father-in-law, whose only wealth is a house he bought from his own salary.
- A 24-year-old unmarried daughter, preparing for a competitive examination, who wants her father to keep supporting her.
Who wins, and under which law? Students commonly get at least two of these wrong. Each is answered below with the correct Section (see the final section for the answers together).
Meaning of Maintenance
Section 3(b) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 says that maintenance includes, in all cases, provision for:
- food,
- clothing,
- residence,
- education, and
- medical attendance and treatment.
Unmarried daughter: in her case, maintenance also includes the reasonable expenses of and incident to her marriage, that is, the cost of the marriage and of everything connected with it.
Remember the definition as five verbs: feed, clothe, house, teach and heal. For an unmarried daughter, add a sixth: marry. Maintenance is not charity or bare survival; it is support for a dignified life.
Sources of the Right to Maintenance
For a Hindu, there are three main sources of the right to maintenance, and each asks a different question.
| Source | Question it asks | Nature |
|---|---|---|
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the "Marriage Act") | Is there a matrimonial case before the court? | Personal law |
| Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (the "Maintenance Act") | What is your relationship with the person you are claiming from? | Personal law |
| Section 144, B.N.S.S., 2023 | Has a person having sufficient means neglected or refused to maintain someone the law protects? | Not personal law; a quick remedy available to every religion |
Section 144 of the B.N.S.S.
Section 144 protects four groups where a person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain them:
- His wife, unable to maintain herself.
- His legitimate or illegitimate child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself.
- His legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury, unable to maintain itself.
- His father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself.
A Magistrate of the first class may then order a monthly allowance.
Keep the three questions in mind: matrimonial case (Marriage Act), relationship (Maintenance Act), neglect by a person of sufficient means (Section 144, B.N.S.S.). Most problem questions turn on choosing the right one.
Maintenance of Wife During a Continuing Marriage: Section 18 of the Maintenance Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (3:11)
A wife's claim can arise in two situations:
- a continuing marriage: the territory of the Maintenance Act; or
- a matrimonial case pending or decided: the territory of the Marriage Act.
Section 18(1): the basic right
Subject to the provisions of the Section, a Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of the Act, shall be entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime.
- The duty comes with the marriage itself, so the husband cannot escape it by saying that he owns no property.
- Because the Section speaks of a wife, it works while the marriage subsists. No matrimonial case is needed.
Section 18(2): right to live separately without losing maintenance
A common misconception is that a wife who leaves her husband's home loses her maintenance. That is not the law. Section 18(2) says that a Hindu wife shall be entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim to maintenance in certain situations. These are best remembered in four boxes, according to what they say about the husband.
Box 1: His conduct towards her
- Desertion: he is guilty of desertion, that is, abandoning her without reasonable cause and without her consent or against her wish, or wilfully neglecting her.
- Cruelty: he has treated her with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in her mind that it will be harmful or injurious to live with her husband.
Box 2: His other relationships
- He has any other wife living.
- He keeps a concubine in the same house in which his wife is living, or habitually resides with a concubine elsewhere. A concubine here means a woman with whom he lives in a sexual relationship outside marriage.
Box 3: His religion
- He has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.
Box 4: Safety valve
- There is any other cause justifying living separately.
Four boxes: conduct, other relationships, religion, and a safety valve. Note for accuracy: clause (c) of Section 18(2), which dealt with a virulent form of leprosy, was omitted in 2019, so it is no longer a ground.
Limits on the right: Section 18(3) and Section 24 of the Maintenance Act
- Section 18(3): a Hindu wife shall not be entitled to separate residence and maintenance from her husband if she is unchaste or ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.
- Section 24 of the Maintenance Act goes further: no person shall be entitled to claim maintenance under this Chapter if he or she has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.
| Who converts | Effect on the wife's maintenance |
|---|---|
| Husband converts | Wife gains a ground to live apart and still claim maintenance (Section 18(2)) |
| Wife converts | Wife loses her claim under the Act (Section 18(3) and Section 24) |
Interim maintenance in a Section 18 suit
A civil suit under Section 18 can take years, and the Section says nothing about interim maintenance. The question of what the wife lives on until the decree reached the Delhi High Court.
Neelam Malhotra v. Rajinder Malhotra (Delhi High Court, decided 6 July 1993, Justice D. K. Jain): Neelam married Rajinder in May 1990. She alleged harassment because the rest of the promised dowry had not come, that she was beaten, and that by August 1990 she was compelled to leave her matrimonial home. She sued her husband and his family for maintenance and for return of her stridhan (property belonging to a woman as her own). While the suit was pending she sought interim maintenance and litigation expenses. The husband, a practising chartered accountant, and his family objected that the Act contains no provision for interim maintenance; he also claimed his income was small and that she was a qualified nursery teacher earning a good salary.
Issue: Can a court grant interim maintenance in a Section 18 suit when the statute is silent?
Held: Yes. When the law makes it compulsory for a husband to maintain his wife, it makes no sense to let her face starvation during a suit that may take decades and then give her maintenance at the end, if she is fortunate enough to survive till then. A court that can grant final relief can also grant it on an interim basis, even without an express provision, because the interim power is incidental and ancillary to the main power. Looking past the husband's low income figures to his real earning capacity, including his close link with the family business, the court ordered Rs. 2,000 a month until the suit ended, to be adjusted against the final amount.
Principle: Interim maintenance is implied in Section 18, because a right one cannot survive to enjoy is no right at all.
Maintenance Pendente Lite: Section 24 of the Marriage Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (8:28)
When a matrimonial case is before the court, the Marriage Act takes over, and here the husband can claim too.
Section 24 deals with maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings. Pendente lite is a Latin expression meaning "while the litigation is pending".
Conditions and scope
- It applies in any proceeding under the Act, such as restitution of conjugal rights, judicial separation, nullity or divorce.
- It must appear to the court that either the wife or the husband has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding.
- On the application of the wife or the husband, the court may order the respondent to pay the petitioner:
- the expenses of the proceeding; and
- monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent, seems reasonable to the court.
- The petitioner is the spouse who applies; the respondent is the other spouse.
Proviso added in 2001
The application for expenses of the proceeding and the monthly sum shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from the date of service of notice on the wife or the husband, as the case may be.
Purpose: a case should be decided on merit, not on who can afford a lawyer.
Farhan lost his job when the start-up he worked for shut down. His wife Zoya runs a bakery business with three outlets, and she files for divorce. Under Section 24, Farhan can ask the court to direct Zoya to pay his litigation expenses and a monthly amount while the case runs.
The husband from the opening scenario can win, but only inside a matrimonial case. He cannot claim under the Maintenance Act, because Section 18 speaks only of a wife. He cannot claim under Section 144 of the B.N.S.S., because it protects a wife, not a husband.
| Remedy | Can a husband claim? |
|---|---|
| Section 24 / Section 25, Marriage Act | Yes (either spouse) |
| Section 18, Maintenance Act | No; speaks only of a wife |
| Section 144, B.N.S.S. | No; protects a wife, not a husband |
Interim maintenance where the marriage is alleged to be void
Section 24 uses the words "any proceeding under this Act", and a petition to declare a marriage void is also such a proceeding.
Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (Supreme Court, three-judge bench, decided 12 February 2025): Held that even if the court prima facie (on a first look) finds the marriage void or voidable, it is not prevented from granting maintenance pendente lite, provided the conditions of Section 24 are satisfied. The relief is discretionary, so the conduct of the applicant is always considered. Principle: a spouse facing a nullity petition can still obtain interim maintenance under Section 24.
So the second person from the opening scenario can succeed.
Permanent Alimony and Maintenance: Section 25 of the Marriage Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (10:55)
Section 25(1)
Any court exercising jurisdiction under the Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto, on application by either the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the applicant for her or his maintenance and support:
- a gross sum (one lump amount), or
- a monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant,
as seems just to the court, having regard to:
- the respondent's own income and other property, if any;
- the income and other property of the applicant;
- the conduct of the parties; and
- other circumstances of the case.
Any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the respondent. A charge means the property stands as security, so unpaid amounts can be recovered from it.
Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (Supreme Court, 2025), on Section 25: Held that the words "any decree" include a decree of nullity. So even a spouse whose marriage is declared void under Section 11 may seek permanent alimony, depending on the facts and the conduct of the parties.
Section 25(2): change in circumstances
If the court is satisfied that there is a change in the circumstances of either party at any time after it has made an order under Section 25(1), it may, at the instance of either party, vary, modify or rescind (cancel) the order in such manner as it may deem just.
A husband paying alimony is a pilot who loses his medical fitness to fly. He can seek a reduction under Section 25(2).
Section 25(3): remarriage or sexual conduct of the recipient
If the court is satisfied that the party in whose favour the order was made:
- has re-married; or
- if that party is the wife, has not remained chaste; or
- if that party is the husband, has had sexual intercourse with any woman outside wedlock,
it may, at the instance of the other party, vary, modify or rescind the order as it deems just. The word "may" means that even here the court decides what is just.
Permanent alimony needs a decree affecting marital status
Can a wife who has no matrimonial case simply ask for permanent alimony under Section 25? No.
Chand Dhawan v. Jawaharlal Dhawan (Supreme Court, 1993): Held that permanent alimony under the Marriage Act is tied to a decree that affects the marital status. If the marriage is intact and no such decree is passed, the wife's personal law claim lies under the Maintenance Act. Conversely, after a divorce she is no longer a "wife" for Section 18, so her personal law claim lies under Section 25 of the Marriage Act.
A distinction examiners love: Section 18 (Maintenance Act) is for a marriage that continues; Section 24 (Marriage Act) is for a marriage on trial; Section 25 (Marriage Act) is for a marriage the court has ruled upon.
| Provision | Stage of the marriage | Who can claim |
|---|---|---|
| Section 18, Maintenance Act | Marriage continues; no matrimonial case needed | Wife only |
| Section 24, Marriage Act | Matrimonial proceeding pending | Wife or husband |
| Section 25, Marriage Act | At or after a decree (including nullity) | Wife or husband |
Maintenance of Widowed Daughter-in-Law: Section 19 of the Maintenance Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (14:07)
Section 19 says that a Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of the Act, shall be entitled to be maintained after the death of her husband by her father-in-law. This right is best thought of as a door with three locks.
Lock 1: Need (proviso to Section 19(1))
The right exists only provided and to the extent that she is unable to maintain herself:
- out of her own earnings or other property; or,
- where she has no property of her own, she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her husband, or her father or mother, or from her son or daughter, if any, or his or her estate.
The father-in-law is the last source, not the first.
Lock 2: Family property (Section 19(2))
The obligation is not enforceable if the father-in-law does not have the means to do so from any coparcenary property in his possession out of which the daughter-in-law has not obtained any share.
Coparcenary property is the joint property of a Mitakshara joint family, in which certain members, called coparceners, acquire an interest by birth. So in such a family, the enforceable duty is tied to the joint family property, not to what the father-in-law earned himself.
Lock 3: Remarriage (Section 19(2))
The obligation ceases on the re-marriage of the daughter-in-law.
The third person from the opening scenario: in a Mitakshara family, a father-in-law whose only wealth is a house bought from his own salary holds no coparcenary property, so her claim under Section 19 cannot be enforced against him. She is not helpless: she can look to her husband's estate, and on the father-in-law's death she may claim as his dependant (see Sections 21 and 22 below).
Is a widow who is an heir to her husband's share still entitled?
Animuthu v. Gandhiammal (Madras High Court, Justice V. Ramaswami, November 1976): Animuthu and his two sons formed a joint family governed by the Mitakshara school, with no partition. One son, Raghavan, died in 1960, leaving his widow Gandhiammal and a minor son. They sued the father-in-law for maintenance at Rs. 75 a month and won in both lower courts. In second appeal, the father-in-law argued that under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the widow had become a Class I heir of her husband and could claim his share in the family property, so she should get no maintenance. It was admitted that no partition had taken place and that he held the entire coparcenary property.
Held: Appeal dismissed. The key word in Section 19(2) is "obtained". A bare right to claim a share is not the same as actually obtaining one. So long as there is no partition and no remarriage, the obligation continues. Her claim runs against the whole coparcenary property in his hands, not merely her husband's interest in it, though her own earnings and any maintenance she gets from other sources are counted while fixing the amount.
Principle: A share in hand ends the claim; a share on paper does not.
Maintenance of Children and Aged or Infirm Parents: Section 20 of the Maintenance Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (17:44)
Section 20(1): the general duty
Subject to the provisions of the Section, a Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents.
The words "his or her" carry big weight: the duty falls on mothers as well as fathers, and on daughters as well as sons.
Section 20(2): minor children
- A legitimate or illegitimate child may claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is a minor.
- Under Section 3, a minor is a person who has not completed the age of 18 years.
- For a minor, the Act does not add the condition that the child must be unable to maintain itself.
- When a son becomes a major, his right under this Section ends.
Section 20(3): unmarried daughter and aged or infirm parent
The obligation to maintain an aged or infirm parent or a daughter who is unmarried extends in so far as the parent or unmarried daughter is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property.
- The duty towards an unmarried daughter therefore continues even after she becomes a major.
- Infirm means weak through illness or disability.
Abhilasha v. Prakash (Supreme Court, decided 15 September 2020): The Supreme Court described the unmarried daughter's right under Section 20(3) as a larger right, to be decided by a civil court, or by a Family Court with jurisdiction under the Act. Principle: an unmarried major daughter who cannot support herself can claim maintenance from her parent under Section 20(3).
So the fourth person from the opening scenario, the 24-year-old aspirant, can succeed if she shows that she cannot support herself.
Explanation: step-mother
In this Section, "parent" includes a childless step-mother.
Hansa married a widower when his son was ten, and never had a child of her own. Forty years later, widowed, old and without income, she has no child of hers to turn to, so the law places the duty to maintain her on her step-son.
Maintenance of Dependants: Sections 21 and 22 of the Maintenance Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (20:10)
When the person who was supporting the family dies, the property goes to the heirs, or to whoever takes under a will, and some people who depended on the deceased may get nothing. Section 21 tells us who counts as a dependant; Section 22 tells us who must pay.
Section 21: who are dependants
Section 21 gives a fixed list of relatives of the deceased. Picture the deceased at the centre of a family tree and look above, beside, below and outside.
| Position | Dependants | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| Above | His or her father; his or her mother | None stated |
| Beside | His widow | So long as she does not re-marry |
| Below (line 1) | His or her son, or the son of his predeceased son, or the son of a predeceased son of his predeceased son | So long as he is a minor |
| Below (line 2) | His or her unmarried daughter, or the unmarried daughter of his predeceased son, or the unmarried daughter of a predeceased son of his predeceased son | So long as she remains unmarried |
| Below (line 3: widowed women) | His widowed daughter; any widow of his son or of a son of his predeceased son | So long as she does not remarry |
| Outside | His or her minor illegitimate son; his or her illegitimate daughter | Son: so long as he remains a minor. Daughter: so long as she remains unmarried |
Predeceased means someone who died before the deceased. Illegitimate children matter here because they generally take nothing from their father's estate as heirs.
Provisos: nearer sources must fail first
Several clauses carry a proviso (a condition) that nearer sources of support must fail first.
- Son's line: covered provided and to the extent that he is unable to obtain maintenance, in the case of a grandson, from his father's or mother's estate; and in the case of a great-grandson, from the estate of his father or mother or father's father or father's mother.
- Daughter's line: the same condition: a grand-daughter, from her father's or mother's estate; a great-grand-daughter, from the estate of her father or mother or father's father or father's mother.
- Widowed daughter: covered provided and to the extent that she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her husband, or from her son or daughter if any, or his or her estate, or from her father-in-law or his father or the estate of either of them.
- Widow of a son, or of a son of a predeceased son: covered provided and to the extent that she is unable to obtain maintenance from her husband's estate, or from her son or daughter, if any, or his or her estate, or, in the case of a grandson's widow, also from her father-in-law's estate.
Section 22: who pays
- Section 22(1): subject to sub-section (2), the heirs of a deceased Hindu are bound to maintain the dependants of the deceased out of the estate inherited by them from the deceased.
- Section 22(2): where a dependant has not obtained, by testamentary or intestate succession, any share in the estate of a Hindu dying after the commencement of the Act, the dependant is entitled, subject to the Act, to maintenance from those who take the estate.
- Section 22(3): the liability of each person who takes the estate is in proportion to the value of the share or part of the estate taken by him or her.
- Section 22(4): notwithstanding sub-sections (2) and (3), no person who is himself or herself a dependant is liable to contribute to the maintenance of others if he or she has obtained a share the value of which is, or would (if the liability to contribute were enforced) become, less than what would be awarded to him or her as maintenance under the Act.
Prince dies leaving a will. His flat worth Rs. 60 lakh goes to his married daughter, his shop worth Rs. 30 lakh goes to his nephew, and a fixed deposit of Rs. 2 lakh goes to his aged mother. He leaves nothing for his minor son born outside marriage.
- Who maintains the boy? The daughter and the nephew, in the ratio 60:30, that is, 2:1 (Section 22(3)).
- The mother? She is herself a dependant, and her small deposit is worth less than what would be awarded to her as maintenance, so she contributes nothing (Section 22(4)). The law does not take from one dependant to feed another.
The widow from the opening scenario: when her father-in-law dies, she becomes his dependant as a widow of his son. If she takes nothing from his estate, and cannot get support from her husband's estate or her children, she can claim maintenance from those who take his estate, including the house he bought from his own salary.
Amount of Maintenance: Section 23 and Section 25 of the Maintenance Act
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (24:53)
Under Section 23, it is in the discretion of the court to determine whether any, and if so what, maintenance shall be awarded. The court must have regard to different factors depending on the claimant.
| Wife, children, or aged or infirm parents (5 factors) | Dependants (7 factors) |
|---|---|
|
|
Section 25 of the Maintenance Act: alteration of amount
The amount of maintenance, whether fixed by a decree of court or by agreement, and whether before or after the commencement of the Act, may be altered subsequently if there is a material change in the circumstances justifying such alteration.
Do not confuse Section 25 of the Maintenance Act (alteration of the amount of maintenance on a material change in circumstances) with Section 25 of the Marriage Act (permanent alimony and maintenance at or after a decree).
Overlapping Remedies and Answers to the Opening Scenarios
▶ Watch this part of the lecture (26:38)
A wife may also use other remedies, such as Section 144 of the B.N.S.S., where "wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband and has not remarried.
Rajnesh v. Neha (Supreme Court, decided 4 November 2020): Because maintenance remedies overlap, the Supreme Court held as follows. It:
- made it mandatory to disclose earlier maintenance proceedings;
- asked later courts to consider an adjustment or set-off; and
- directed that maintenance be awarded from the date of the application.
Answers to the four opening scenarios
| Claimant | Result | Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Husband claiming from a higher-earning wife | Wins only inside a matrimonial case | Sections 24 and 25, Marriage Act |
| Woman facing a petition to declare the marriage void | Can still get interim maintenance | Section 24, Marriage Act (Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur) |
| Widow claiming from a father-in-law with only self-acquired property in a Mitakshara family | Cannot enforce Section 19 against him, but may later claim as his dependant | Section 19(2); Sections 21 and 22, Maintenance Act |
| Unmarried adult daughter | Can claim if she cannot maintain herself | Section 20(3), Maintenance Act |
Quick revision
- Maintenance means feed, clothe, house, teach and heal; for an unmarried daughter, marry as well (Section 3(b), Maintenance Act).
- Under Neelam Malhotra, interim maintenance is implied in Section 18.
- Under Animuthu, a share in hand ends a widow's claim, but a share on paper does not.
- Dependants sit above, beside, below and outside the deceased (Section 21), while those who take the estate pay in proportion to what they took (Section 22).
- Section 18 is for a marriage that continues, Section 24 for a marriage on trial, and Section 25 for a marriage the court has ruled upon.
