On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court remarked that a spouse with the ability to earn but opting to remain jobless without a valid explanation should not be allowed to impose financial responsibilities on the other spouse through maintenance.
Justices V Kameswar Rao and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta of the division bench made this statement while decreasing the maintenance amount awarded by a family court to a wife in the midst of divorce proceedings initiated by her husband.
The bench emphasized that a spouse, despite having the capacity to earn, cannot simply choose unemployment without a reasonable explanation and expect the other party to bear the financial burden.
The court clarified that the exact amount of maintenance need not be determined with precise mathematical calculations but should aim to provide relief to the spouse who is financially strained during the ongoing legal proceedings.
Additionally, the court highlighted the gender-neutral nature of the provision for maintenance during the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) proceedings. Sections 24 and 25 of the HMA outline the rights, responsibilities, and obligations arising from the marriage, emphasizing equality between the parties.
In the specific case before the High Court, the husband contested an order requiring him to pay ₹30,000 per month to his wife during the divorce proceedings. The husband's argument revolved around the fact that he had already been directed to pay ₹21,000 under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and this amount was increased to ₹30,000 during the HMA proceedings.
The husband's legal representative cited his limited income and financial responsibilities towards supporting his siblings, brother, and elderly parents, along with repaying a loan taken for his brother's marriage. The wife's counsel countered that she was engaged in social work and not receiving a salary from her current hospital employment.
After reviewing the evidence, the court determined that the husband's post-deduction salary was ₹56,492 and noted the absence of reasons provided by the Family Court for enhancing the maintenance amount.
Acknowledging the husband's financial commitments, the court reduced the interim maintenance from ₹30,000 to ₹21,000. However, it stipulated an automatic yearly enhancement of ₹1,500 to account for inflation and rising prices.
