Does Section 25(1) HMA apply after a mutual consent divorce?

Yes. A party can seek permanent alimony even after dissolution if maintenance was not provided earlier. Consent terms cannot bar the court’s power.

Can consent terms waive the right to claim maintenance forever?

No. Agreements cannot oust the court’s Section 25 jurisdiction. Clauses blocking future maintenance are void for public policy and can be severed.

What principles guided the court on maintenance?

Permanent alimony relates to the broader right to live with dignity. Courts ensure fairness despite prior consent if welfare demands support.

Was Geeta entitled to claim maintenance despite earlier terms?

Yes. The court held Section 25(1) was applicable and Geeta could move for maintenance despite consent terms stating otherwise.

Did the court increase the maintenance amount on appeal?

No. Due to lack of material on record, the court did not enhance the amount fixed by the Family Court.

Geeta Satish Gokarna v. Satish Shankarrao Gokarna AIR 2004

Geeta Satish Gokarna v. Satish Shankarrao Gokarna (AIR 2004 Bom 345)

Classroom-style explainer on Section 25(1) HMA — can a spouse seek maintenance after divorce despite consent terms? What limits do public policy and court power set?

Bombay High Court 2004 Hindu Marriage Act Citation: AIR 2004 Bom 345 Reading time: 7–9 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi India Published: Oct 31, 2025 Keywords: Section 25(1), maintenance, alimony

Quick Summary

The parties divorced by consent. The consent terms said no future cases and no maintenance claims. Later, Geeta sought permanent maintenance under Section 25(1) HMA.

The Court held that private terms cannot shut the court’s power to award permanent alimony. Clauses blocking maintenance are against public policy and can be cut off. Section 25(1) applied; however, without fuller data, the maintenance amount fixed by the Family Court was not raised.

Issues

Is Section 25(1) HMA applicable after a consent divorce?
Can Geeta claim maintenance despite the consent terms?

Rules

Section 25(1) HMA: A spouse may ask for permanent alimony even after dissolution if maintenance was not earlier provided.
No ouster by agreement: Consent terms cannot remove the court’s power; clauses forbidding future maintenance are void.
Right to life & dignity: Maintenance links to living with dignity; courts protect it despite private bargains.

Hindu Marriage Act — Section 25(1)

Facts — Timeline

View Image

Timeline of the Section 25(1) maintenance dispute

1995: Marriage dissolved by mutual consent (HMA). Terms: no future proceedings; Geeta will not claim maintenance.

Geeta applies for permanent maintenance: ₹25,000/month.

Satish cites changed health circumstances (post-1991 heart attack).

1999: Family Court awards ₹2,000/month maintenance.

Geeta challenges the amount; matter considered by higher court.

Arguments

Appellant (Geeta)

Section 25(1) lets her seek permanent alimony even after divorce.
Consent terms cannot waive a statutory right linked to dignity.
Family Court amount is too low; needs reassessment.

Respondent (Satish)

Parties agreed: no future claims; bar should hold.
Change in his health/means reduces capacity to pay.
Family Court already fixed a fair amount.

Judgment

Section 25(1) applies. A spouse may claim maintenance after dissolution if not already provided.
Consent terms severed. Clauses barring future proceedings/maintenance cannot oust court power; they offend public policy.
Maintenance quantum unchanged. Due to limited material, the Court did not enhance the ₹2,000/month set by the Family Court.

Bottom line: Statutory power and dignity prevail over private no-maintenance clauses.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 25(1) HMA confers power on the court to award permanent alimony post-dissolution. Private agreements cannot disable this power. Clauses waiving maintenance are void as against public policy and can be severed from otherwise valid consent terms.

Why It Matters

Protects vulnerable spouses after divorce when support was overlooked.
Confirms courts cannot be disarmed by private contracts.
Ties maintenance to dignity and fair livelihood post-marriage.

Key Takeaways

Yes—Section 25(1) works even after a consent divorce.
No—consent terms cannot bar court-ordered maintenance.
Public policy overrides private “no-claim” clauses.
Quantum needs evidence; courts won’t enhance without record.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “CAP: Court–Applies–Post-divorce.”

Court power: Section 25(1) belongs to the court.
Applies despite terms: No ouster by consent.
Post-divorce relief: Maintenance can start after dissolution.

IRAC Outline

Issue	Rule	Application	Conclusion
Does Section 25(1) allow maintenance after consent divorce despite “no-claim” terms?	Section 25(1) enables post-dissolution alimony; agreements cannot oust jurisdiction; public policy protects dignity.	Consent terms saying “no maintenance/ no cases” conflict with statute and public policy; they are severed.	Section 25(1) applies; Geeta can claim maintenance; amount not enhanced due to lack of material.

Glossary

Permanent Alimony: Long-term maintenance a spouse may receive post-divorce.
Public Policy: Legal standard that voids private terms harming societal interests or statutory rights.
Severability: Invalid clauses can be cut out while keeping the rest of the agreement intact.