High Court: Daughter can claim marriage expense from parents

Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that an unmarried daughter can claim the expenses of marriage from her parents under the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
A division bench of the high court in Bilaspur was hearing a petition filed by a 35-year-old woman, Rajeshwari, a native of Chhattisgarh’s Durg district.
The bench of Justices Goutam Bhaduri and Sanjay S Agrawal on March 21 allowed her plea for hearing by admitting that an unmarried daughter can claim the amount of her marriage from her parents under the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, said the petitioner’s advocate AK Tiwari.
The bench set aside the order dated 22 April 2016 passed by the Principal Judge of family court Durg and remanded the matter to the family court for adjudication of the same on merits in the spirit of Section 3(b) (ii) of the Act of 1956. The court has directed the parties to appear before the family court.
The petitioner, daughter of an employee of Bhilai Steel Plant (BSP) Bhunu Ram, filed a petition in Durg family court under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and made a claim that maintenance to the tune of around ? 20 lakh be given to her in the mode of marriage expense.
The family court had on 7 January 2016 dismissed the application by stating that there is no provision in the Act that a daughter can claim the amount of her marriage.
In her plea, Rajeshwari said that the respondent (her father), Bhanu Ram, is going to retire and likely to receive ? 55 lakh as retirement dues, therefore, appropriate writ be issued directing the respondent-employer Bhilai Steel Plant to release a part of his retirement dues to the tune of ? 20 lakh in her favour.
Challenging the order of the family court, Rajeshwari had moved the high court stating that as per the law, an unmarried daughter can demand the expenses of marriage from her father, claiming that the expense comes under the purview of maintenance, Mr Tiwari said.
The bench considered the decision as significant and it has been approved for reporting (AFR), he said, explaining that the case would now be given place in all the law books.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

18 − eight =