Civil Suit for Maintenance Under Sections 18–20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956

This article is for educational and legal awareness purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or solicitation. Please consult a qualified advocate for advice on specific legal matters.

Overview

A Hindu wife, a widowed daughter-in-law, a minor child, or an aged parent who is denied support has more than one legal route available. The faster, more commonly used route is the summary maintenance order under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — the successor, from 1 July 2024, to Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. But Hindus also have a separate, older civil remedy: a regular maintenance suit under Sections 18 to 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA). This article explains the civil-suit route under HAMA — who can sue whom, what a court considers in fixing the amount, and how the procedure and outcome differ from the summary BNSS remedy.

Statutory Framework

HAMA applies to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. Section 4 of the Act gives it overriding effect over any prior Hindu law text, custom, or usage on matters it covers, and over any other enactment inconsistent with it, except as the Act itself provides otherwise.

Maintenance of a Wife — Section 18

Under Section 18(1), a Hindu wife is entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime. Section 18(2) entitles her to live separately from her husband without forfeiting this claim if he is guilty of desertion or cruelty, keeps another wife or a concubine, has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion, or if there is any other cause justifying her living separately. Section 18(3) carves out a disqualification: a Hindu wife is not entitled to separate residence and maintenance if she is unchaste, or if she herself ceases to be a Hindu by conversion.

Maintenance of a Widowed Daughter-in-Law — Section 19

Section 19(1) entitles a Hindu widow to claim maintenance from her father-in-law after her husband’s death, but only where she is unable to maintain herself from her own earnings or property, and is unable to obtain maintenance from her deceased husband’s estate, or from her own father or mother, or from her son or daughter. Section 19(2) limits this obligation: it is enforceable only to the extent the father-in-law has means from coparcenary property in his possession out of which the daughter-in-law has not already obtained a share, and the obligation ceases on her remarriage.

Maintenance of Children and Aged Parents — Section 20

Section 20 obliges a Hindu, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents. A child may claim maintenance from the father or mother so long as the child is a minor (Section 20(2)). The obligation towards an aged or infirm parent, or a daughter who is unmarried, extends only so far as that parent or daughter is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property (Section 20(3)). The Explanation to Section 20(3) extends “parent” to include a childless step-mother.

How the Amount Is Fixed — Section 23

Section 23 sets out the factors a civil court weighs in fixing the amount of maintenance under Sections 18 to 20: the position and status of the parties; the reasonable wants of the claimant; where the claimant lives separately, whether the separation is justified; the value of the claimant’s own property and any income from it or from her own earnings; and the number of persons entitled to maintenance under the Act. As with the BNSS remedy, there is no fixed formula — the court exercises discretion on the facts before it.

Procedure to File a Maintenance Suit

A claim under Sections 18 to 20 HAMA is not made by an “application” to a Magistrate; it is filed as a regular civil suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking a decree for maintenance (and, where relevant, arrears).

Which Court

Where a Family Court has been established for the area, jurisdiction lies there and not with the ordinary civil court. Under Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, a Family Court exercises the jurisdiction of a district court or subordinate civil court over the suits and proceedings listed in the Explanation to that sub-section, which by clause (f) expressly includes “a suit or proceeding for maintenance.” Section 8(a) of the same Act makes this exclusive: once a Family Court is established for an area, no district court or subordinate civil court may exercise jurisdiction over such a suit in relation to that area. Where no Family Court has been established, the suit is filed in the ordinary civil court having territorial jurisdiction under the CPC — typically where the defendant resides or the cause of action (the refusal to maintain) arose.

Filing the Suit

The plaint must set out the relationship relied on (marriage, widowhood and relationship to the father-in-law, parentage, or the parent-child relationship), the defendant’s means, and the plaintiff’s inability to maintain herself or himself, and — where separate residence is claimed under Section 18(2) — the specific ground relied on. Supporting material typically includes proof of the relationship (marriage certificate, birth certificate), and evidence of the defendant’s income and assets and the plaintiff’s own means. The plaint is presented with a court fee computed under the Court Fees Act as applicable in the state; the exact rate for a maintenance suit varies by state and should be confirmed with the court concerned.

Trial and Decree

Unlike the summary procedure under Section 144 BNSS, a HAMA maintenance suit follows the ordinary course of a civil trial — written statement, framing of issues, evidence of both sides (including cross-examination), and a reasoned judgment resulting in a decree. A decree passed in the suit can be challenged by a regular first appeal, as with any other civil decree, and is enforced through execution proceedings, such as attachment of the defendant’s property or salary, rather than through the direct-imprisonment mechanism available under BNSS.

How This Differs from Section 144 BNSS

Both routes can operate side by side, and a claimant is not confined to one merely because it is secular or personal law in origin. The practical differences are in speed, forum, and enforcement. Section 144 BNSS is a summary proceeding before a Magistrate of the First Class (or a Family Court exercising that jurisdiction), meant to give quicker, interim relief and generally enforced through a coercive warrant or imprisonment for default. A HAMA suit under Sections 18 to 20, by contrast, is a full civil trial that produces a final, appealable decree, but takes considerably longer to reach a conclusion given the requirements of pleadings, evidence, and appeal.

Key Case Law

In Chand Dhawan v. Jawaharlal Dhawan, 1993 (3) SCC 406, the Supreme Court held that maintenance remedies created by different statutes are distinct and are not interchangeable. The case concerned a wife who sought permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 without any decree affecting matrimonial status having been passed — the Court held that Section 25 relief presupposes such a decree, and that a wife whose marriage subsists must instead pursue her claim under Section 18 HAMA. The Court observed that “the court is not at liberty to grant relief of maintenance simplicitor obtainable under one Act in proceedings under the other,” describing such questions as “matters which go to the root of the jurisdiction.” The decision is a reminder that HAMA’s Sections 18 to 20 are a self-contained civil remedy, not a substitute step within matrimonial proceedings under a different statute, and cannot be conflated with them.

Practical Points

A HAMA maintenance suit is a civil suit under the CPC, filed before the Family Court where one has been established for the area, or the ordinary civil court otherwise.
Section 18 covers a wife’s maintenance and the specific grounds on which she may live separately without losing her claim; Section 18(3) disqualifies a wife who is unchaste or has ceased to be a Hindu.
Section 19 covers a widowed daughter-in-law’s maintenance from her father-in-law, but only where she cannot obtain it elsewhere, and only to the extent of his coparcenary means.
Section 20 covers minor children and aged or infirm parents, including a childless step-mother.
A HAMA decree and a Section 144 BNSS order can both be sought, but they are separate proceedings with separate procedures, timelines, and enforcement mechanisms; a person unsure which route suits their facts may consider consulting a qualified advocate.

Takeaway

For Hindus, Sections 18 to 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 provide a civil-suit route to maintenance that runs alongside, and independently of, the faster summary remedy under Section 144 BNSS. The civil route takes longer because it is a full trial ending in an appealable decree, but it remains available as a distinct statutory remedy that a Magistrate’s summary order under BNSS does not substitute for.

Useful Resources

Disclaimer: The information provided on this website is for general legal awareness and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, advertisement, or solicitation. No reader should act or refrain from acting based on this information without seeking professional legal counsel. Advocate Akhil Singh and this website are not liable for any actions taken based on the content provided herein.