Section 146 of BNSS : Section 146: Alteration in allowance.
BNSS
JavaScript did not load properly
Some content might be missing or broken. Please try disabling content blockers or use a different browser like Chrome, Safari or Firefox.
Explanation using Example
Example 1:
Ravi and Priya were married for 10 years before they decided to get a divorce. The court ordered Ravi to pay Priya a monthly maintenance allowance of ₹20,000 under Section 144. After a year, Ravi lost his job and his financial situation worsened. Ravi approached the Magistrate with proof of his changed circumstances. The Magistrate, considering Ravi's new financial condition, decided to reduce the monthly maintenance allowance to ₹10,000.
Example 2:
Sunita was receiving a monthly maintenance allowance of ₹15,000 from her ex-husband, Rajesh, as ordered under Section 144. Sunita later remarried. Rajesh approached the Magistrate with proof of Sunita's remarriage. The Magistrate, satisfied with the evidence, cancelled the maintenance order from the date of Sunita's remarriage.
Example 3:
Amit was ordered to pay a monthly maintenance allowance of ₹12,000 to his elderly father under Section 144. After a few years, Amit's father inherited a significant amount of money from a relative, which changed his financial situation. Amit approached the Magistrate with proof of his father's improved financial condition. The Magistrate, considering the new circumstances, decided to reduce the maintenance allowance to ₹5,000.
Example 4:
Meera was receiving a monthly maintenance allowance of ₹18,000 from her ex-husband, Suresh, as ordered under Section 144. Meera later received a lump sum amount as per their customary law, which was payable upon divorce. Suresh approached the Magistrate with proof of this payment. The Magistrate, satisfied with the evidence, cancelled the maintenance order from the date the lump sum was paid.
Example 5:
Anita was ordered to pay a monthly maintenance allowance of ₹10,000 to her child under Section 144. Later, the Civil Court passed a decree for the recovery of dowry from Anita. The Civil Court took into account the sum already paid by Anita as monthly maintenance while determining the amount to be recovered for dowry, ensuring that there was no double recovery.