#bagee

The Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSME) sector is a cornerstone of the Indian economy, contributing significantly to GDP and employment. The MSMED Act, 2006 addresses long-standing challenges faced by MSMEs, particularly delayed payments. Key provisions include mandatory payment timelines of 45 days (Section 15), deemed acceptance of transactions within 15 days (Section 2(b)), and compound interest on delayed payments (Section 16).

The Micro and Small Enterprise Facilitation Council (MSEFC) ensures speedy dispute resolution within 90 days through Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms. Recent initiatives like the Samadhaan Scheme provide an online platform for filing payment complaints, while government schemes under Atma Nirbhar Bharat enhance liquidity. Judicial decisions, such as Maa Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and Gupta Power Infrastructure Ltd., have upheld MSME rights, setting strong precedents.

With proposed legal reforms and increasing awareness, the MSMED Act is driving positive change, safeguarding MSMEs, and securing their vital role in India's economic growth.

Background:

On 22nd February 2024, the High Court of Delhi, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla, addressed a petition filed by a husband challenging the order dated 15th December 2021 by the Family Courts at Karkardooma, Delhi. The Family Court had directed the husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000 per month to his wife and Rs. 12,000 per month to their child.

Husband's Argument:

The husband, represented by Advocates Ms. Anubha Dhulia and Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, argued that his income was inaccurately assessed by the Family Court. Despite submitting affidavits showing an income of Rs. 14,000 to Rs. 24,000 per month, the Family Court determined his income to be Rs. 70,000 per month, allegedly based on conjectures.

Ruling by the High Court of Karnataka on Matrimonial Cases

Case Overview

In a recent ruling dated 26th July 2023, the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishna S. Dixit of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru addressed the long pendency of matrimonial cases, emphasizing the importance of their swift resolution. The case in focus, Writ Petition No. 14769 of 2023, was filed by Sri. N Rajeev against Smt. C. Deepa under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the expeditious disposal of his matrimonial case (M.C. No. 2514/2016) pending before the Vth Additional Judge Family Court, Bangalore. This case highlights the need for swift Karnataka matrimonial case resolution.

Petitioner's Grievance

The petitioner, represented by Advocate Sri. Basavaraj R Bannur, sought a decree for the dissolution or nullity of marriage under Section 13(1)(IA) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The primary grievance was the prolonged delay in the trial and disposal of his case, which had been pending since 2016.

Practice Areas - Aegle Marmelos Law Firm in Chennai & Madurai

Criminal: Violent crimes (murder, assault)

Sexual offenses (rape, harassment)

Property crimes (theft, burglary)

Financial crimes (fraud, embezzlement)

Cybercrimes (hacking, online fraud)

Drug offenses, including NDPS Act violations (possession, trafficking)

Traffic violations (DUI, hit and run)

Government offenses (sedition, terrorism)

Environmental crimes (pollution, wildlife offenses)

Public order crimes (rioting, public intoxication)

Defamation (slander, libel)

INTRODUCTION Maintenance Laws In India:

The Maintenance Laws in India under various provisions was to compel a man to perform the moral obligations, that he owes to society in respect of his wife, children and parents By offering swift and straightforward yet limited relief, these provisions aim to prevent neglected wives and children from being left impoverished and marginalized, thus avoiding their descent into vagrancy, immorality, and crime for survival. The inability of a wife, child, or elderly parent to support themselves can lead to significant social issues. Consequently, the state must intervene to prevent such inability from escalating into broader societal problems, as unchecked, it could result in widespread vagrancy.

DEFINITION:

According to the dictionary, maintenance refers to support or sustenance. This term is not explicitly defined within the marriage laws of any religious community. However, the entitlement of claiming maintenance is certainly based on the assumption that the claimant doesn’t have sufficient means to support herself. The maintenance generally covers the expenses for necessities or essentials for the substance of life. However, it is not merely a right for the survival of the claimant. This is evident from the provisions outlined in the aforementioned acts, which provide the court with guidelines on the factors to consider when determining the amount of maintenance. The court is to look into the possession of the property of both the husband and the wife, the ability of the husband to earn, the conduct of the parties and other circumstances to decide the amount of maintenance. Before determining the amount of maintenance, the court must consider the status of the parties and the standard of living they enjoyed during the marriage.

Q1: What is maintenance in the context of Indian law?

Answer:

Maintenance in Indian law refers to the financial support provided by one spouse to another during or after a legal separation or divorce. It is not defined explicitly in the marriage laws of any of the religious communities in India. Still, it is a measure to ensure that a spouse who cannot support themselves financially is provided for. The entitlement to claim maintenance is based on the assumption that the claimant does not have sufficient means for self-support.

Q2: Who can claim maintenance?

Answer:

Typically, any spouse who does not have adequate means to maintain themselves can claim maintenance. This includes neglected wives, children, and parents. The provisions are designed to prevent these dependents from falling into poverty which could lead to social issues.

The Supreme Court criticized Tamil Nadu district collectors for not attending the meeting with the Enforcement Directorate (ED) as ordered. The court emphasized the importance of obeying orders and respecting the law and the Constitution. The collectors have been given another opportunity to meet with the ED by the end of April. The court expressed dissatisfaction with the collectors' behaviour and stressed the need for compliance. The collectors' lawyer explained their busy schedule due to elections and data collection.