Permanent Alimony Must Secure Wife's Future; No Arithmetic Formula Can Determine Quantum: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that no arithmetic formula can be applied while determining permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Court observed that while fixing permanent alimony, courts must consider the parties' status, the husband's financial capacity, the wife's future needs, inflation and the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage.

A Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad enhanced the permanent alimony payable to a divorced wife to ₹30 lakh, directing the amount to be paid in four equal instalments within twelve months.

The appeal arose from a decree of divorce granted by the Family Court, Latehar, dissolving the marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. During the pendency of the appeal, the husband solemnised a second marriage. Observing that reunion between the parties was no longer possible, the High Court confined the proceedings to determining permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act and directed both parties to file affidavits disclosing their assets and liabilities in terms of Rajnesh v. Neha.

The wife disclosed that she was unemployed and assisted her mother in running a roadside vegetable stall, earning approximately ₹200–300 per day. The husband, a Constable, stated that his gross monthly salary was ₹66,097, while his net salary was ₹40,354, with deductions towards a home loan, insurance, provident fund and maintenance.

The husband contended that he was financially incapable of paying a substantial amount, whereas the wife agreed to the dissolution of marriage provided she received adequate permanent alimony in full and final settlement. After interacting with both parties, the Court noted that no settlement could be reached.

Discussing the scope of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Bench observed that the provision was enacted to alleviate the hardship faced by a spouse who lacks sufficient independent income to maintain themselves or meet litigation expenses. The Court observed:

“The basic behind this is to sustain the life of husband or wife, if having no sufficient source of income.”

Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in U. Sree v. U. Srinivas, the Bench reiterated:

“No arithmetic formula can be adopted for grant of permanent alimony to wife. However, status of parties, their respective social needs, financial capacity of husband and other obligations must be taken into account.”

The Court noted that the wife was only 28 years old and observed that her future financial security also had to be considered. While the Family Court had awarded maintenance of ₹10,000 per month, the High Court observed that the wife would have to survive primarily on the income generated from the permanent alimony and that future inflation could not be ignored.

The Bench observed:

“The respondent-husband has constant source of income but the appellant-wife is to survive on the amount of interest to be received from the amount of permanent alimony and the future inflation etc. is also required to be kept in mind before allowing the permanent alimony.”

Balancing the husband's financial obligations with the wife's right to maintain a reasonable standard of living, the Court held:

“Considering the monthly salary of the respondent-husband at gross salary of ₹66,097/-, his obligations, and the reasonable requirements of the appellant-wife, this Court is of the view that a lump sum of ₹30,00,000... would be just, fair, and reasonable as permanent alimony.”

Accordingly, the Court directed the husband to pay ₹30 lakh as permanent alimony in four equal instalments within one year.

Case Title: Lalmuni Devi v. Naresh Oraon

Case Number: First Appeal No. 201 of 2025

Appearance: Mr. Aayush Ojha, Ms. Tanya Raj and Mr. Chiranjeev Mahto for the Appellant. Mr. Zaid Ahmed for the Respondent.

Click Here To Read/Download Order