“To deny maintenance to estranged wife & child is worst offence, even from humanitarian perspective”: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on Monday observed that even from a humanitarian standpoint, denying maintenance to an estranged wife and child is the worst offence.

The court was hearing a petition by a man challenging a December 2021 order of the Family Court, Karkardooma, wherein he was directed to pay Rs.20,000 as a lump sum for the interim maintenance of his estranged wife and child. The arrears were to be paid off in two months, with additional interim maintenance due on the 5th of every month.

Justice Asha Menon stated that it is a sad reality that husbands force their wives to file execution petitions to postpone payments, even after a court of law has determined her entitlement, as an interim measure.

The petitioner’s case was that he was only willing to pay Rs.4,000 per month to his wife and child because his monthly income was only Rs.28,000 and he needed to pay Rs. 10,000 from it to his expenses and his parent's maintenance.

It was further claimed that his estranged wife earned Rs.30,000 per month by taking tuitions.

On Contrary, Counsel appearing for the wife contended that the man’s father was a government servant and needed no financial assistance/maintenance.

It was further contended that bank records showed that the petitioner earned significantly more than Rs.28,000 and lived with his father, so he had no rent expenses.

Court noted that as per the statement taken under oath by the learned family court, the petitioner owns a Hyundai EON car and a Samsung smartphone. Regrettably, he wishes to limit the respondent's maintenance to Rs.4,000 (before the High Court, Rs.5,000), which is less than half of the amount he allegedly spends on his elderly parents.

“To say the least, this attitude is repugnant. No husband or father should deny a decent standard of living to a homemaker wife and their minor child,” the Court added.

Accordingly, Court observed that an estranged husband's malafide intentions are to depress his income as much as possible for the sadistic pleasure of seeing the agony of someone who has no choice but to be dependent on him. This may be dictated by his egoistic propensity to also possibly teach his wife a lesson for not falling in line with whatever be his dictates.

“It is time that there is a change in the attitude when litigation is filed by one spouse against the other,” the court noted.

The court while emphasizing the role of Family Courts stated that the entire structure of Counseling Centers, as well as the availability of mediation before and during litigation, are all aimed at a more amicable and less tortuous resolution of matrimonial and family problems.

Therefore, Court dismissed the petition with costs of Rs. 20,000 on the petitioner and ordered the Registry to release the sum of Rs.1,00,000 to the wife.

Case Title: Pradeep Kumar v. Smt Bhawana & Anr.