In a judgment delivered on May 29, 2025, the Supreme Court held that a wife is entitled to a level of maintenance that reflects the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably secures her future. A Division Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta enhanced the permanent alimony awarded to the wife from ₹20,000 to ₹50,000 per month, subject to a 5% increase every two years.
Background
The case originated from a matrimonial dispute adjudicated by a Family Court and later by the High Court. The marriage was solemnized in 1997, and a child was born in 1998. In 2008, the husband filed a matrimonial suit under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. During the pendency of proceedings, the wife filed multiple applications seeking interim maintenance under both the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The Family Court initially awarded interim maintenance of ₹8,000 per month. In a subsequent proceeding under CrPC, maintenance was fixed at ₹8,000 for the wife and ₹6,000 for the child.
In 2016, the Family Court dismissed the divorce petition on the ground that cruelty was not proved. However, the High Court, on appeal, reversed this finding and granted a decree of divorce on the grounds of mental cruelty and irretrievable breakdown of marriage. It directed the husband to:
- Redeem the mortgage of the flat where the wife and child resided and transfer the title deed to her name;
- Allow the wife and son to continue residing in the same flat;
- Pay ₹20,000 per month as permanent alimony, with a 5% increase every three years;
- Bear the educational expenses of the son, including ₹5,000 per month towards private tuition.
Supreme Court Proceedings
The wife appealed to the Supreme Court challenging only the quantum of alimony. The Court issued notice limited to this question on February 20, 2023. An interim order was passed on November 7, 2023, enhancing the alimony to ₹75,000 per month effective from November 1, 2023, due to the respondent’s non-appearance despite service.
Upon later appearance, the respondent sought vacation of the interim order. He contended that his current monthly income was ₹1,64,039, earned from employment at the Institute of Hotel Management, Kolkata, and that his household expenses were ₹1,72,088 per month. He also stated that he had remarried and was supporting a dependent family and aged parents.
In response, the appellant submitted that the amount of ₹20,000 initially awarded as interim maintenance was made final by the High Court without adequate consideration of the husband’s financial capacity, and that his income was approximately ₹4,00,000 per month, based on his previous employment with the Taj Hotel.
Observations and Decision
The Supreme Court observed:
“The respondent-husband’s income, financial disclosures, and past earnings establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount.”
The Court emphasized that:
“The appellant-wife, who has remained unmarried and is living independently, is entitled to a level of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably secures her future.”
The Bench further noted:
“The inflationary cost of living and her continued reliance on maintenance as the sole means of financial support necessitate a reassessment of the amount.”
Consequently, the Court held:
“A sum of ₹50,000/- per month would be just, fair and reasonable to ensure financial stability for the appellant-wife. This amount shall be subject to an enhancement of 5% every two years.”
As for the son, who is now 26 years old, the Court declined to direct any further mandatory support but clarified that the father may voluntarily assist him, and that his rights to inheritance remain unaffected.
Final Order
Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court modified the High Court’s judgment to enhance the permanent alimony to ₹50,000 per month with biennial increments of 5%. The contempt petition connected with the case was also disposed of accordingly.
