Path: Home » NEWS against MEN » Divorce » Court Denies Maintenance to Woman Earning More Than Estranged Husband

Court Denies Maintenance to Woman Earning More Than Estranged Husband

In a rare ruling, a Mumbai court refused to grant interim maintenance to a 36-year-old woman living in Tardeo. The court found that she earned Rs 4 lakh more annually than her estranged husband. A sessions court has now upheld this decision, denying the woman any financial relief from her husband.

The court observed that since the woman’s income was higher than her husband’s, she was not entitled to receive maintenance from him. Judge C.V. Patil stated, “An earning wife is also entitled to maintenance, but other circumstances need to be considered. Here, the husband’s income is lower than the wife’s. Therefore, the magistrate’s order is legal and proper.”

The woman had filed a domestic violence case against her husband and in-laws in 2021, claiming she was forced to move out of their Dadar home after the birth of their child. Despite denying her maintenance, the judge ordered the man to pay Rs 10,000 per month for their child’s upkeep. The husband, however, denied paternity, citing his sexual dysfunction.

In court, the woman testified that she conceived while living with her husband. She also claimed her husband was being treated for sexual dysfunction but had not informed her. When her pregnancy was discovered, her husband and in-laws began questioning her character.

The judge referred to Section 112 of the Evidence Act, which states that if a child is born during a marriage and the parents had access to each other, the child is presumed legitimate. The judge said, “The husband and wife were living together when she conceived. There is no claim that the husband had no access to her. Therefore, under Section 112 of the Evidence Act, the child is presumed legitimate.”

After the magistrate court’s November 2022 order, both parties filed separate appeals in the sessions court. The woman sought maintenance for herself and an increase in child support, while the husband continued to deny paternity.

Case Title: Anonymous vs. State of Maharashtra

Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *