The Karnataka High Court has doubled the maintenance for a stay-at-home wife, recognizing childcare as a full-time job. Justice M. Nagaprasanna dismissed the husband’s claim that his wife was “lazing around” despite being qualified to work, ruling that the husband must pay ₹36,000 per month instead of the ₹18,000 initially ordered by the family court.
The court was addressing a petition filed by the wife, who challenged the family court’s order of ₹18,000 per month in interim maintenance during their matrimonial dispute. She had sought ₹36,000.
Justice Nagaprasanna noted, “The wife-mother has quit her job to take care of the children, which involves countless responsibilities and necessary expenses. As a homemaker and mother, she works tirelessly around the clock. The husband cannot claim that she is lazing around and not earning money, as taking care of children is a full-time job.”
The wife’s counsel highlighted that the husband, employed by Canara Bank, earned close to ₹90,000 a month and was not covering the children’s school fees and other expenses. Despite her qualifications, the wife had quit her job at the husband’s request to care for their children.
In opposition, the husband’s counsel argued that the wife was not a “dutiful wife” and that his job was unstable, preventing him from paying more than ₹18,000. He also pointed out that the wife had previously worked as a lecturer and could earn independently, and that he was responsible for his elderly mother.
However, the court noted that the woman quitting her job at her husband’s request was a matter of record. Citing Supreme Court decisions in Shamima Farooqui vs Shahid Khan and Reema Salkan vs Sumer Singh Salkan, the court emphasized that maintenance must align with the living standard the wife and children had while living with the husband.
The court dismissed the husband’s claims of job instability, noting that he held a secure position as a manager at Canara Bank, earning over ₹70,000 a month. “He is in a job that offers security of tenure. The pay that he receives can never be reduced; it can only grow. Therefore, those submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent/husband are to be rejected as misleading and mischievous,” the court recorded.
Recognizing the significant responsibilities of a stay-at-home mother, the court enhanced the interim maintenance from ₹18,000 to ₹36,000, affirming that childcare is a full-time job deserving adequate financial support.
