Deductions from maintenance are unjustified, Allahabad High Court orders back payment in divorce proceedings

In an important judgment that underscores the principles of fairness and justice in marital disputes, the Allahabad High Court recently considered the issue of permanent maintenance in a long-running divorce case. The court's decision not only underscores the importance of providing equitable financial support to divorced spouses, but also reiterates that payments to children cannot be unfairly deducted from the maintenance awarded to the spouse. This judgment adds to the evolving jurisprudence on spousal support and ensures that the rights of all parties are protected.

Background of the case:

In a first appeal (No. 34 of 2009) filed before the Allahabad High Court, the appellant challenged the judgment of the Chief Judge of the Family Court, Kanpur Nagar, dated 14 September 2007, in the case relating to the award of permanent maintenance following a divorce granted under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the ground of cruelty.

The parties had married in June 1993 and separated shortly thereafter in August 1994. They had a daughter who was born in 1994. The Family Court had in an earlier judgment awarded a lump sum maintenance of Rs. 140,000 plus an adjustment of Rs. 38,000 awarded to the daughter pursuant to an earlier order.

Legal aspects:

1. Determination of the permanent maintenance claim: The central issue in court was the adequacy of the lump sum maintenance awarded by the family court and the legality of the deduction of Rs 38,000 from it.

2. Adjustment of payments to the subsidiary: Whether the amount paid to the daughter pursuant to the previous judgment is to be offset against the maintenance to be paid to the applicant.

Decision of the court:

The Division Bench, consisting of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Rameshallowed the appeal in part. The Court confirmed the original amount of Rs. 140,000 as a reasonable amount for permanent maintenance, taking into account the short duration of the marriage, the respondent's remarriage and his financial commitments which include taking care of his children from his second marriage and his siblings with special needs.

The court, however, found merit in the appellant's contention that the Rs 38,000 paid to the daughter should not be deducted from the maintenance awarded to the appellant. The court observed:

“The amount paid to the parties’ daughter may not have been set off against the amount payable to the appellant.”

In this background, the court ordered the respondent to pay an additional Rs. 50,000 to the appellant within one month to correct the deduction made by the lower court.

Important observations:

The Court stressed the importance of fairness in determining maintenance and recognised the independent financial needs of both the applicant and her daughter. The judges found that, although the financial situation of the respondent and the short duration of the marriage were relevant, these could not justify the deduction from the applicant's maintenance on account of the payments made to the daughter.

The appeal was allowed in part, with the Court ordering payment of the additional sum and imposing conditions for payment of the amount, including the withdrawal of all pending actions brought by the appellants against the respondent.

Read also

Case details:

– Reference number: First Appeal No. 34 of 2009

– Bench: Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh

– Counsel for the appellant: Shree Ram Gupta, Ram Gupta, Smt. Abha Gupta

– Defendant’s counsel: Manish Gupta, Manish Tandon