Delhi High Court: Unemployed Spouse Should Not Burden Partner with Maintenance
The Delhi High Court recently ruled that if a spouse has the ability to earn but chooses to remain unemployed without a valid reason, they should not impose financial responsibility on their partner in the form of maintenance.
The court clarified that maintenance should not be calculated with strict mathematical accuracy but should fairly support the spouse who genuinely cannot sustain themselves during ongoing legal proceedings.
Court Reduces Maintenance in Divorce Case
The ruling came while the court reviewed a case where a family court had ordered a husband to pay ₹30,000 per month to his wife as maintenance during divorce proceedings. A division bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta reduced this amount, stating that the wife had a reasonable capacity to earn but chose not to work.
“The spouse who can earn but remains unemployed without justification should not shift the entire financial burden onto the other partner,” the bench stated.
The court also emphasized that maintenance provisions under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) are gender-neutral.
Husband’s Financial Burden Considered
The husband, who had challenged the maintenance order, argued that he was already paying ₹21,000 to his wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The family court had later increased this amount to ₹30,000 in the HMA proceedings.
He also informed the court that:
- His net salary after deductions was ₹56,492.
- His wife had a Delhi University degree and had previously earned ₹25,000 as a receptionist.
- He was responsible for supporting his parents, siblings, and repaying a loan for his brother’s marriage.
On the other hand, the wife claimed she was only working as a social worker and had no regular income.
Court’s Final Decision
After reviewing the case, the Delhi High Court found no justification for the increased maintenance and reduced it to ₹21,000 per month. However, considering inflation and rising costs, the court ruled that the amount would automatically increase by ₹1,500 each year.
The court also noted that since the wife had a good educational background and no barriers to employment, she could earn a living rather than relying entirely on maintenance from her estranged husband.
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==
