Top
Top Stories

25% Of Husband’s Net Salary Just & Proper To Be Awarded As Maintenance To Wife: SC [Read Judgment]

Ashok KM
21 April 2017 3:25 PM GMT
25% Of Husband’s Net Salary Just & Proper To Be Awarded As Maintenance To Wife: SC [Read Judgment]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Supreme Court, in Kalyan Dey Chowdhury vs Rita Dey Chowdhury, has upheld a Calcutta High Court observation, which by relying on a judgment of the apex court, had held that 25 per cent of the husband’s net salary would be just and proper to be awarded as maintenance to the wife.

The high court, in the instant case, observing that the net salary of the husband was Rs. 95,000 per month, enhanced the maintenance amount to Rs. 23,000 per month. This was assailed before the apex court.

A bench comprising Justice R Banumathi and Justice Mohan M Shantanagoudar observed that the amount of permanent alimony awarded to the wife must be befitting the status of the parties and the capacity of the spouse to pay maintenance and it is always dependent on the factual situation of the case and the court would be justified in moulding the claim for maintenance passed on various factors.

The court also upheld the observation made by the high court, referring to Dr Kulbhushan Kumar vs Raj Kumari and Anr, wherein it held that 25 per cent of the husband’s net salary would be just and proper to be awarded as maintenance to the wife.

“However, since the appellant has also got married second time and has a child from the second marriage, in the interest of Page 9 justice, we think it proper to reduce the amount of maintenance of Rs. 23,000 to Rs. 20,000 per month as maintenance to the respondent-wife and son,” the bench said while partly allowing the appeal.

Read the Judgment here.

Next Story