Allahabad High Court.
Maintenance Law News – Allahabad High Court Denies Maintenance to Wife Earning ₹73,000 and Owning ₹80 Lakh Flat: Allahabad – The Allahabad High Court has set aside a family court’s order requiring a husband to pay ₹15,000 per month as maintenance to his wife, while upholding the direction to provide ₹25,000 per month for the maintenance of their minor child. This ruling highlights the evolving dynamics in maintenance disputes and the court’s approach to evaluating the financial capacity of both spouses.
The case originated from a revision plea filed by the husband, a software engineer earning approximately ₹1,75,000 per month, challenging the family court’s decision under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which mandates maintenance for wives and children in cases of marital disputes.
In its earlier order, the family court had directed the husband to pay ₹15,000 monthly to his wife, in addition to ₹25,000 per month for their minor son, effective from May 6, 2023. The court had also instructed the husband to clear arrears in equal installments within three months.
However, the High Court noted that the wife, also employed as a software engineer with Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), had a monthly income of ₹73,000. Furthermore, the court observed that the wife had recently purchased a flat in Lucknow valued at ₹80,43,409, which was booked in January 2023, adding weight to the argument that her financial position was secure.
READ: Supreme Court Strips Allahabad High Court Judge Justice Prashant Kumar of Criminal Roster
While referencing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Rajnesh v Neha, which established that a wife’s income should not automatically bar her from claiming maintenance, the Allahabad High Court pointed out that the key consideration is whether the wife’s income allows her to maintain a standard of living commensurate with the marital home. In this case, the Court concluded that the wife’s income of ₹73,000 per month was sufficient for her to support herself, especially given her ability to invest in significant assets like the flat.
The Court also emphasized that the financial needs of the minor child remained a priority, irrespective of the wife’s income. Consequently, while the High Court set aside the family court’s direction for the wife’s maintenance, it upheld the order for ₹25,000 per month for the child’s upkeep.
The ruling brings into focus the evolving interpretation of maintenance laws, where the financial independence of the wife is increasingly considered in determining whether the husband should be obliged to pay maintenance. In the present case, the wife’s financial stability through her income and property acquisition played a crucial role in the Court’s decision.
Advocate Tilak Raj Singh and Brijendra Singh represented the husband in the matter, while Advocate Ram Kumar Singh and Vishwas Shukla appeared for the wife.
This judgment serves as a reminder of the courts’ balancing act between ensuring fair maintenance for dependents and recognizing the financial capacity and independence of the spouse requesting support.
