It is not stray act or two of adultery that dis-entitle wife from claiming maintenance

 Sections 397 and 401 read with Section 482 CRPC Indian Majority Act, Setting aside of order Petitioner states that respondent was capable of maintaining herself and was earning sufficient income Employment status was concealed Petitioner states that wife living in adultery and therefore not entitled for maintenance And by way of affidavit, son of parties stated that he with his mother started living together with third person as husband and wife Respondent states that ground of adultery was taken on behest of their son Also son lives with petitioner since 2015 and petitioner would have brought fact relating to adultery at first instance  No evidence to prove adultery  Held, grounds taken by petitioner did not establish that respondent was living in adultery  It is not stray act or two of adultery that dis-entitle wife from claiming maintenance But it is course of continuous conduct on wife's part by which it can be called that she is living an adulterious life Petitioner was not able to show that respondent continues to be employed and has sufficient means to maintain herself No cogent reason to interfere with Trial Court judgement - Petition dismissed. [Paras 27, 28 and 29]

Pradeep vs Deepika CRLREVP 417/21 13/04/22 [ CHANDRA JJ ]

[ DELHI HIGH COURT ]