(1.) Appellant impugns order dtd. 6/2/2020, whereby the application of the appellant under Sec. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has been dismissed solely on the ground that an order of maintenance has already been passed in the Domestic Violence petition. Family Court has held that once an order of maintenance has been passed by the concerned court in the domestic violence petition, there is no requirement of passing any further order on maintenance on the application under Sec. 24 of the Act and the wife can be paid maintenance only in one proceedings.
(2.) The judgment rendered by the Family Court is clearly contrary to the settled position of law that there is a distinction between the scope and power exercised by the two courts and merely because an order is passed under one statute does not disentitle the spouse from claiming maintenance under the other statute, however, the order passed in one proceedings has to be taken into account and the amount being paid thereunder is to be adjusted from the amount awarded under the other proceedings.
(3.) In RD Vs. BD, 264 (2019) DLT 10 (DB), a Division Bench of this Court has held that as various statues have been enacted to provide maintenance to the wife, it is nowhere the intention of the Legislature that once any order passed in either of the proceeding, said order would debar re-adjudication of the issue of maintenance in any other court.