Wife Can't Be Awarded Interim Maintenance Solely Based On Husband's Income, Ignoring Other Factors Like Her Qualifications: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that a Family Court cannot award interim maintenance to a wife being titled solely towards a husband's income while ignoring other factors relevant for grant of the relief. Justice Saurabh Banerjee said that even though the husband is a man of means, the Family Court granting interim maintenance cannot be oblivious of the cumulative variables which ought to...
The Delhi High Court has held that a Family Court cannot award interim maintenance to a wife being titled solely towards a husband's income while ignoring other factors relevant for grant of the relief.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee said that even though the husband is a man of means, the Family Court granting interim maintenance cannot be oblivious of the cumulative variables which ought to be considered.
The Court emphasised that a balance has to be struck between the rights and liabilities of the parties as also the primary intent of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. which cannot be circumvented or not given effect to.
The observations were made while reducing the interim maintenance awarded to a wife by a Family Court from Rs 30,000 to Rs 25,000 per month.
The revision petition was filed by the husband challenging the Family Court's June 2024 order directing him to pay Rs 30,000 per month to his wife from the date of filing of her maintenance application.
The parties had married in 1995 and had two children. The wife had sought maintenance in 2021. The Family Court had initially awarded her Rs 25,000 as ad-interim maintenance in January 2022, before subsequently enhancing the amount to Rs 30,000 per month.
Before the High Court, the husband argued that he was bearing the financial and educational expenses of both children, including the elder daughter who was pursuing an MBBS course.
He also submitted that his wife was an MBA (Finance) graduate, had rental and interest income and was residing in a house purchased by him. He further cited his own outstanding loans and liabilities.
On the other hand, the wife opposed the plea, submitting that the Family Court had considered the husband's income affidavit and Income Tax Return, which showed his income to be over Rs 63 lakh for the relevant assessment year. She also pointed out that he was running a cargo business.
Granting relief to the husband, Justice Banerjee said that although the Family Court had duly noted the other factors involved in the case but it failed to give due weightage to them while passing the impugned order, and tilted “solely towards the income of the husband.”
The Court noted that both children were residing with the husband and that he was solely bearing their educational and financial expenses.
It further noted that the wife had been residing for a considerable period in a residential accommodation exclusively purchased by and belonging to the husband.
The Court also took note of the wife's qualifications of having MBA (Finance) degree as well as other degrees and diplomas in astrology and was capable of earning for herself.
It also noted that she was receiving rental income of Rs 10,450 per month and interest of approximately Rs 4,400 per month from fixed deposits.
Observing that interference qua the impugned order was required, the Court reduced the interim maintenance from Rs 30,000 to Rs 25,000 per month.
Ir directed that the reduced amount be payable with effect from April 12, 2021, the date of filing of the maintenance application.
Title: X v. Y