
Bombay High Court: Man Must Pay Maintenance to Wife Even If Facing Financial Issues
The Bombay High Court ruled that a man cannot escape paying maintenance to his estranged wife and children, even if he is facing financial difficulties.
The Bombay High Court ruled that a man cannot escape paying maintenance to his estranged wife and children, even if he is facing financial difficulties.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that a wife’s love for another man does not amount to adultery unless there is a physical relationship. The court rejected a husband’s plea to deny maintenance, stating that financial support cannot be denied based on emotional attachment.
The Supreme Court ruled that a woman can claim maintenance from her second husband even if her first marriage wasn’t legally dissolved. The decision aims to protect women from financial hardship.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a wife cannot be denied maintenance unless continuous adultery at the relevant time is proven. A single act of adultery is not enough.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that in matrimonial cases, the husband’s convenience takes priority when he has custody of minor children. The court directed the husband to bear the wife’s travel expenses to attend court proceedings.
The Delhi High Court ruled that rejecting a maintenance application in divorce proceedings does not prevent a wife from seeking maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, as the provision is distinct in its scope and purpose.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that ₹2,500 monthly maintenance is too low for a middle-class woman to meet basic needs. The court increased the amount to ensure fair support.
The Gauhati High Court ruled that a husband cannot avoid his legal obligation to pay maintenance to his wife by entering into a private agreement. The court emphasized that a wife’s right to maintenance is a statutory entitlement under Section 125 CrPC.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that a wife leaving her marital home due to ill-treatment is entitled to maintenance, rejecting the husband’s claim that she moved out with mutual consent.
The Allahabad High Court has clarified that magistrates cannot issue arrest warrants for non-payment of maintenance without first exhausting recovery methods like attaching the defaulter’s property under Section 421 of CrPC.