In a significant ruling by the Delhi High Court, the assessment of maintenance and financial obligations in matrimonial disputes has been highlighted. The court addressed the case between Mr. Original Name and Mrs. Original Name, emphasizing the need for ensuring dignified sustenance for women who leave their marital home. The judgement underscores the crucial role of a husband’s financial support post-separation. Read on for insights into the court’s decision on maintenance assessments and financial obligations in matrimonial disputes.
Facts
- The court assessed the income of Mr. Original Name based on various immovable properties owned by him and his family, determining it to be ₹2,50,000/- per month.
- The learned Family Court reviewed relevant documents, including Income Tax Return, to evaluate the business and income of Mr. Original Name and his family.
- An interim maintenance of ₹65,000/- per month was granted to Mrs. Original Name, wife of Mr. Original Name, starting from the filing date of MT No 5861521/16.
Arguments
- Learned Family Court assessed petitioner’s income at ₹2,50,000/- per month.
- Petritioner claimed to have other financial liabilities.
- Income assessment was based on income tax returns for specific years for grant of interim maintenance.
- Petitioner claimed Respondent No 2 earned ₹13,000/- to ₹14,000/- per month.
- Family Court noted considerable income gap between petitioner and Respondent No 2.
- Family Court acknowledged escalating cost of living and need for reasonable maintenance for Respondent No 2.
- Petitioner claimed current income of ₹13,000/- to ₹15,000/- per month from sale and purchase of old cars.
- Petitioner argued that previous businesses considered by Family Court were closed, impacting income assessment.
- Petitioner maintained inability to pay awarded maintenance and showed payment of ₹20,00,000/- to Respondent No 2.
- No evidence presented to support alleged deteriorated financial condition that could affect maintenance assessment.
Analysis
- Income tends to be downplayed in matrimonial disputes, making income tax returns less reliable.
- Parties in matrimonial disputes often hide their true income, leading to the need for courts to estimate a reasonable earning.
- Courts must ensure that a woman who leaves her marital home is able to sustain herself and live at a similar standard as she would have in her husband’s house.
- Sustenance for a woman in such situations does not mean mere survival but a life of dignity.
- Bona fides shown by paying a certain amount is considered immaterial in the context of financial support obligations.
- A husband cannot evade his duty to financially support his wife, especially when she leaves her matrimonial home.
- Section 125 CrPC aims to alleviate the financial and mental anguish women face when they leave their matrimonial home, especially when they have children.
- The husband’s status and financial obligations play a crucial role in ensuring sustenance for the wife and children.
- The petitioner previously paid one crore to his former wife, indicating his substantial financial means.
- The petitioner’s presentation of his bank statement to the court suggests a potential attempt to conceal his true financial status.
- The petitioner’s claim of borrowing money to pay maintenance appears questionable and may indicate a lack of transparency.
- No evidence has been provided to show that the petitioner’s former wife is able to maintain herself independently.
- Bank statements indicate the petitioner transfers maintenance amount to a friend’s account, raising concerns about transparency.
- The legal obligation for a husband to support his wife financially is emphasized, especially if the husband is capable of supporting himself.
- Maintenance granted to a wife should be adequate for her to maintain dignity similar to her matrimonial home.
- The Court upholds the terms without interference.
- The petitioner, an able-bodied individual, is obliged to financially support Original Name 2.
- The maintenance award by the trial court based on incomplete representations is justified.
Decision
- The defences raised by the petitioner and the allegations and counter allegations will be the subject of the trial.
- The interim monthly maintenance of ₹65,000 per month for Original Name of Respondent No 2 is deemed reasonable.
- The final decision on the defences, allegations, and counter allegations will be made after both parties have presented their evidence.
Case Title: VIKAS MITTAL Vs. STATE & ANR. (2024:DHC:4032)
Case Number: CRL.REV.P.-306/2017
