The High Court of Delhi has modified a Family Court order, reducing the monthly maintenance awarded to a wife and child from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 17,500. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, presiding over the case, emphasized that the maintenance amount must be determined in a balanced manner, ensuring adequate support for the dependents while considering the husband’s financial obligations, including a home loan and the financial support he provides to his parents.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Revision Petition filed by the husband, challenging an order dated April 30, 2024, by the Judge, Family Courts, Karkardooma, Delhi. The Family Court had directed him to pay Rs. 25,000 per month to his wife and their minor son under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Background of the Case
The husband and wife were married on July 2, 2017. A son was born from the wedlock on June 13, 2018. According to the judgment, the wife left the matrimonial home in April 2018 and subsequently filed a petition for maintenance in November 2019, alleging that the petitioner earned Rs. 70,000 per month.
The Family Court, assuming the petitioner’s income to be Rs. 50,000 per month, initially granted an interim maintenance of Rs. 20,000 per month. This was later reduced to Rs. 15,000 by a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court. In its final judgment on April 30, 2024, the Family Court awarded a total maintenance of Rs. 25,000 per month.
Arguments of the Parties
The petitioner-husband argued that the Family Court had erred in its assessment. He contended that his wife had left the matrimonial home of her own free will and without sufficient reason. He submitted documents, including his Affidavit of Income and bank statements, showing his net salary was approximately Rs. 36,000 per month, not Rs. 50,000. He highlighted his financial liabilities, which included a housing loan EMI of Rs. 11,341, rent of Rs. 9,000, and expenses for his parents and himself.
The petitioner further claimed that his wife, a B.Com graduate, was capable of earning and was, in fact, earning over Rs. 15,000 per month through tailoring work. He also informed the court that he had lost his job in September 2024 and was subsequently re-employed at a lower salary of Rs. 21,500 per month.
The respondent-wife countered these claims, asserting that she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home due to harassment and ill-treatment by the petitioner and his family, who had allegedly demanded a car and cash. She stated that she was beaten on December 31, 2017, while she was pregnant and that the petitioner never came to see their child after his birth. She maintained that the maintenance amount awarded by the Family Court was reasonable and based on the evidence presented.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
The High Court first addressed the petitioner’s claim that his wife had deserted him without reason. Justice Krishna noted that the wife had made “specific averments that she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home because of ill treatment.” Since the petitioner did not cross-examine her on this testimony or adduce any evidence to support his own assertions, the Court upheld the Family Court’s finding that the wife had not left without sufficient cause.
On the quantum of maintenance, the Court examined the petitioner’s bank statements, which reflected a salary between Rs. 39,000 and Rs. 41,000. The Court found that the Family Court had “rightly noted his salary as Rs. 40,000/- per month.”
However, the High Court disagreed with the amount of maintenance awarded. It observed that the petitioner’s liability towards his home loan EMI of Rs. 11,000 per month was “apparent from his Bank statement.” The Court also factored in the husband’s responsibility towards his parents. The judgment noted that the wife, on the other hand, had not provided specific details of her and the child’s expenses.
Regarding the petitioner’s subsequent reduction in salary, the Court stated that these were “subsequent events which are required to be proved by the Petitioner.” The Court clarified that his option to file an application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. for modification based on altered circumstances remains open.
In setting the final maintenance amount, the Court laid down a guiding principle, stating, “The maintenance amount must be determined in a balanced manner; it should be one that ensures adequate support for the wife and child, while also taking into account the Petitioner’s financial obligations of his liability towards Home Loan, his expenses and responsibility towards parents.”
Final Decision
Considering the totality of the circumstances, the High Court modified the Family Court’s order. It reduced the total maintenance from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 17,500 per month, allocating Rs. 10,000 for the wife and Rs. 7,500 for the child. This amount is to be paid from the date of the filing of the maintenance petition.
The Court disposed of the petition, clarifying that the order is without prejudice to the rights of the parties to seek further modification under Section 127 Cr.P.C. or other provisions of law.
