Sadiq Subhani v Sadia Arooj and others

Case summary

The judgment in brief

The Supreme Court held that a 20% annual maintenance increase runs on the original amount when the decree is silent on compounding, while section 17A(3) does not cap a court-ordered increase at 10%.

Question of law

The legal question

Is a 20% annual maintenance increase compounded when the final decree prescribes the rate but does not specify the method, and does section 17A(3) cap it at 10%?

Court holding

What the Court decided

The express 20% rate remains binding. When the decree is silent on compounding, the increase applies each year to the original amount. Section 17A(3)'s 10% default applies where no annual rate is prescribed.

Result

Outcome and directions

Appeal allowed; High Court's compound-calculation direction set aside; appellate judgment requiring a non-compound increase and deferring recovery of calculated overpayment restored.

Practical effect

What the decision means in practice

Appeal allowed; High Court's compound-calculation direction set aside; appellate judgment requiring a non-compound increase and deferring recovery of calculated overpayment restored.

This summary states the immediate effect recorded in the decision. The original judgment and the facts of the particular case remain controlling.