Supreme Court Ruling: No Maintenance for Working Wife with Sufficient Salary

Supreme Court Ruling: No Maintenance for Working Wife with Sufficient Salary

The Supreme Court recently passed a significant judgment denying maintenance to a wife who earns a sufficient salary while awarding maintenance to the couple’s daughter. The verdict was delivered by a bench of Justice Shantanagoudar and Justice Khanna on September 16, 2019.

Background of the Case

The case stems from a divorce decree issued by the Additional District Judge (ADJ), Delhi, on March 21, 2009. The decree, filed under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA), dissolved the marriage in favor of the husband.

The wife contested this decree in the High Court. However, the High Court upheld the divorce, stating:

• The couple had been separated for nearly a decade.
• Several police complaints had been filed, showing an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.
• The court ruled that the relationship was beyond repair.

Supreme Court Decision

When the wife challenged the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court, the court dismissed the petition. However, it addressed the issue of maintenance before delivering its verdict.

The Supreme Court stated that the wife, being a working professional with a sufficient salary, was not entitled to maintenance. Instead, the court awarded maintenance to the couple’s daughter, Kumari Preksha.

Court Orders

The court issued the following directives:

1. Child Maintenance: ₹30,00,000 was awarded for the daughter’s maintenance. This amount must be deposited within eight weeks.
2. Marriage and Other Expenses: The father, Sagar Sethi, was directed to pay ₹10,00,000 for the daughter’s marriage and related expenses. Of this, ₹5,00,000 must be paid directly to the child within two years.
3. Fixed Deposit for the Child: The maintenance amount must be kept in a fixed deposit for four years. The mother can use the interest to cover the child’s expenses.
4. Quashing of Litigation: All pending litigation, including FIR No. 49/2007 filed at Vikas Puri Police Station, was quashed.

Conclusion

This ruling reinforces the principle that a financially independent spouse may not be entitled to maintenance. It also highlights the court’s focus on securing the well-being and future of the child involved in such cases.

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==