Justice Asha Menon of the Delhi High Court highlighted a concerning issue: some husbands are forcing their wives to file execution petitions to delay maintenance payments, despite existing court orders.
In her ruling, Justice Menon stated that these husbands often show malicious intent by underreporting their income. This behavior is driven by the satisfaction of watching their wives suffer, who are often left with no choice but to rely on them. Such actions are believed to be motivated by ego and a desire to punish wives who do not comply with their demands.
The case in question involved a man challenging a December 2021 order from a family court in Karkardooma. He was ordered to pay ₹20,000 as interim maintenance to his estranged wife and child. He was required to clear any arrears within two months and make monthly payments by the 5th of each month.
However, the man claimed he could only afford to pay ₹4,000 per month, arguing his monthly income was just ₹28,000. He also stated that he needed to contribute ₹10,000 for his parents’ maintenance. Additionally, he alleged that his wife was earning ₹30,000 per month from private tutoring.
In response, the counsel for the wife and child argued that the man’s father was a retired government employee and did not require financial assistance. They also presented evidence showing the husband earned more than ₹28,000 per month and lived with his father, eliminating rental expenses.
The High Court criticized the husband’s attitude, describing it as disgraceful. Justice Menon pointed out the unfairness of expecting a mother and a growing child to manage with ₹4,000, while the husband and his parents enjoyed a comfortable lifestyle with up to ₹28,000 for themselves.
Justice Menon also questioned the husband’s reluctance to increase his income to meet his responsibilities as a husband and father. She noted that his accusations against his wife earning extra income lacked evidence.
In conclusion, Justice Menon found no errors in the family court’s order and dismissed the husband’s plea. The court also imposed a cost of ₹20,000 on the petitioner for his actions.
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==
