New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has observed that a spouse who has reasonable earning capacity but chooses to remain unemployed and inactive without adequate explanation should not be allowed to assign unilateral responsibility for cover to the other partner to bear the costs of maintenance payments.
The Supreme Court made this observation while reducing the amount of monthly maintenance from Rs 30,000 to Rs 21,000 that a husband has to pay to his estranged wife under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA).
It said that the woman had claimed that she had no independent source of income but had a proper educational background as a graduate of Delhi University.
“As alleged, she appears to have undertaken social work voluntarily, although there was no obstacle to meaningful employment. The spouse who has reasonable earning capacity but chooses to remain unemployed and inactive without giving sufficient explanation or indicating serious efforts to find employment should not be allowed to unilaterally assign responsibility for the other party of costs,” a bench of Justices V Kameswar Rao and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said.
The judges said that maintenance does not have to be paid with mathematical precision, but is intended to provide relief to the spouse who is unable to finance and support his or her livelihood during the pendency of the case and to ensure that the party does not have to suffer from the lack of sources of income.
It said the maintenance provisions under the HMA are gender neutral and Sections 24 and 25 of the Act govern the rights, duties and responsibilities arising out of marriage between the parties.
The Supreme Court was hearing the man's appeal against a trial court's order directing him to pay Rs 30,000 monthly maintenance to his estranged wife and legal costs of Rs 51,000.
He said the trial court had earlier asked him to pay Rs 21,000 a month to the woman but this was later increased to Rs 30,000 without any change in circumstances.
The man said he was earning a cash salary of Rs 47,000 and had to support his family and was unable to pay Rs 30,000 per month.
The man claimed that the woman works in a hospital here and earns Rs 25,000 a month.
However, the woman stated that she only worked as a social worker and did not receive a salary from the hospital.
The couple married in 2018, but the woman returned to her parents' home in July 2020 due to differences between them.
The Supreme Court observed that the net salary received by the man after deductions and refunds is Rs 56,492 and there is no evidence on record to show that deductions as per the pay slip were made to abscond by him only after the litigation between the parties began maintenance .
“In view of the facts and circumstances, while considering the amount of maintenance, the liabilities of the complainant (husband) as well as his duties towards other family members cannot be ignored,” it said.
The high court said that the woman's maintenance of Rs 21,000 per month till disposal of the petition in the trial court was appropriate and should be paid along with the legal costs or arrears as per the order of the family court.
In view of inflation and rising prices, maintenance during the pendency of divorce proceedings will be increased by Rs 1,500 per month for each subsequent year till disposal of the cause of action, it said.
(Published on November 22, 2023, 11:04 IST)
Comments are closed.