The Madhya Pradesh High Court clarified that directing a husband to submit his salary slip in a maintenance case is not a violation of privacy or constitutional rights. It helps determine fair maintenance for the wife and children.
The Delhi High Court ruled that occasional adultery does not amount to “living in adultery” under Section 125(4) CrPC, allowing a wife to claim maintenance. The court emphasized the need for continuous adultery to refuse maintenance.
The Supreme Court emphasized that maintenance should provide financial stability without being punitive. In Rajnesh vs. Neha, the court outlined guidelines for determining fair alimony, ensuring transparency between spouses.
The Karnataka High Court doubled a stay-at-home mother’s maintenance, acknowledging that caring for children is a full-time job. The court dismissed the husband’s claims of financial instability and increased her maintenance from ₹18,000 to ₹36,000.
The Madras High Court has ruled that a wife and children from a second marriage are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, even if the first marriage is still legally valid. This decision came as the court dismissed a petition challenging a Family Court’s order for maintenance.
The Kerala High Court ruled that an unmarried daughter who has reached adulthood cannot claim maintenance from her father solely on the grounds of financial inability. The court emphasized that evidence of physical or mental incapacity is required to claim maintenance under Section 125(1) CrPC.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a wife can seek maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, even after receiving alimony, if she is unable to support herself or her children. The court upheld a monthly maintenance award of Rs. 15,000.
The Gauhati High Court ruled that a husband cannot avoid his duty to pay maintenance by entering into an agreement with his wife. This decision reinforces the wife’s statutory right under Section 125 CrPC.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that an estranged wife cannot be denied maintenance simply because she is well-educated, highlighting that maintenance decisions depend on various factors including the status and income of both parties.
The Supreme Court ruled that a working wife with a sufficient salary is not entitled to maintenance, but awarded maintenance to the daughter. The decision highlights the court’s stance on financial independence and child support.
