In which of the following cases was it held that “the rights conferred under section 25 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 supersedes any contract to the contrary. The fact that the date of decree makes no difference”?

All India Bar Examination (AIBE) 16-XVI Previous Year Question Papers with Answers

Practice Mode:

76.

In which of the following cases was it held that “the rights conferred under section 25 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 supersedes any contract to the contrary. The fact that the date of decree makes no difference”?

A: Surrenderabal Vs Suppiah

B: Mukesh teli Vs Bharti Teli

C: Sesi Ammal Vs Thaiyu

D: Ammal Laxmi Vs Krishna

The answer is: C

<< Previous Question

Next Question >>

Explanation

The correct option is C: Sesi Ammal Vs Thaiyu.

This case was decided by the Madras High Court on April 17, 1963. The court held that a Hindu wife who had agreed to receive maintenance at a fixed rate, binding herself not to claim a higher rate even if the circumstances were to change, could still maintain a suit for increase of maintenance under Section 25 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The court reasoned that Section 25 of the Act gave an overriding effect to the statutory right of maintenance, and that any contract to the contrary would be void. The court also observed that the date of the decree or agreement did not make any difference, as the Act applied to all decrees or agreements made before or after its commencement.