Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court has recently held that where both spouses are equally qualified and earning equally, interim maintenance can not be granted to the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

A division bench Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna concurred with the Family Court’s decision and opined that after considering the respective income and expenditure of the parties, the Family Court had rightly denied any maintenance to the wife in the case at hand.

However, considering the income of the parties and appreciating that the child’s responsibility had to be shared by both the parents, court reduced the interim maintenance by the father for the child from Rs. 40,000 to Rs. 25,000.

In the present case, a couple got married on July 6, 2014, and on June 24, 2016, one son was born from the wedlock. However, in February 2020, the parties separated because of the differences between them.

The appellant-wife filed a divorce petition and also filed an application under Section 24 of the Act seeking interim maintenance. The wife held a degree in B.Sc and MBA (Banking and Finance) and was presently working. She was drawing a salary of Rs. 2.5 lakhs per month and claimed that she was paying Rs. 92,940 per month and Rs. 25,137 per month as EMI towards a loan taken for a flat and car respectively.

It was the wife’s case that from the meager income that was left thereafter, she was barely able to manage and provide reasonable facility to her child whose all educational and other overhead expenses were paid by her.

She asserted that the husband earlier transferred Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 30, 000 per month towards the child’s expenses but he had stopped paying the amount since November 2021. Thus, the wife claimed maintenance of Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 60,000 for herself and for the child respectively. She further claimed Rs. 50,000 towards the litigation expenses.

On the contrary, the respondent-husband was equally qualified and held a degree of B.Tech and M.Tech and was currently working. He had an earning of USD 7134, which was equivalent to Rs. 5,60,000 per month, and had a monthly expenditure of USD 7092.

The husband submitted that he barely had sufficient income to meet his own personal expenses and admitted that he had stopped paying since November, 2021 because the wife had withdrawn herself from the matrimonial relationship.

Notably, on February 23, 2023, the Family Court had considered the respective income and expenditure of the parties and held that the wife was equally qualified and was earning, thus she was not entitled to any maintenance.

However, the Family Court had directed the husband to pay Rs. 40,000 per month towards the interim maintenance and expenses of the child. Thus, aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the wife filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of maintenance for the child to Rs. 60,000 per month and also interim maintenance for herself. Additionally, the husband aggrieved by the order, filed an appeal to reduce the amount of maintenance to Rs. 21, 500 per month.

The court noted that both the parties were highly qualified and the wife was getting Rs. 2.5 lakhs per month while the husband was getting USD 7134 per month.

“However, if the husband’s earning was converted to Indian Rupee by applying Purchase Power Parity Index, the amount becomes Rs. 1,65,651 per month or if simple exchange rate was applied, the amount was equivalent to Rs. 5,60,000”, the court said.

Court opined that although the husband was earning in dollars, it could not be overlooked that his expenditure was also in dollars and he had explained that he had a monthly expense of about USD 7000 and was left with little money for saving.

Court also opined that the object of Section 24 of the Act is to ensure that during the matrimonial proceedings under the Act, either party should not be handicapped and suffer any financial disability to litigate only because of paucity of source of income. “The provision of interim maintenance was made to help either spouse to sail through litigation expenses and ensure that they were able to live comfortably”, it added.

“Learned Judge, Family Court after considering the respective income and expenditure of the parties, held that the wife is equally qualified and earning and has thus, rightly denied any maintenance to her”, the court held.

Conclusively, the court held, “Considering the income of the wife and the husband and also appreciating that the responsibility of maintaining the child has to be shared jointly by both the husband and the wife, we find that the interim maintenance in the sum of Rs.40,000/- for the child is liable to be reduced to Rs.25,000/- per month”.

Case Title: X v. Y