Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court has delivered a significant judgment enhancing interim maintenance for a wife, emphasizing the inadequacy of a minimal maintenance amount for a middle-class woman.
Allahabad High Court Raises Interim Maintenance for Wife Amid Financial Dispute
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra made important observations on the financial challenges faced by women seeking maintenance from their husbands.
The court addressed the case of Shilpy Sharma, who filed a criminal revision against an order passed by the Additional Family Court in Maintenance Case No. 3016 of 2014. The initial order awarded her an interim maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- per month from her husband, Rahul Sharma.
Court Criticizes Meager Maintenance Amount, Orders Higher Monthly Support
The court observed, “It is almost impossible for a woman who belongs to a middle-class family to have even a square meal from the paltry amount of Rs. 2,500/-.” Highlighting the inadequacy of the maintenance amount, the court critically examined the respondent’s financial status.
Discussing the case details, the court noted that Shilpy Sharma was married to Rahul Sharma on 23.01.2007 and was ousted from her matrimonial home on 18.09.2007. The wife alleged that she had no independent source of income and sought maintenance.
The court found several discrepancies in the husband’s claims about his financial status. It observed that the respondent had been drawing a substantial salary and leading a luxurious lifestyle, which contradicted his claims of financial constraints.
In its significant order, the court enhanced the interim maintenance from the date of application (01.09.2014) to November 2024 to Rs. 5,000/- per month. From December 2024 onwards, the maintenance amount was further increased to Rs. 10,000/- per month during the pendency of the maintenance case.
The court directed that arrears of interim maintenance be calculated at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- and paid in five equal consecutive monthly installments, with the first installment due on 10th January 2025.
The court placed reliance on Supreme Court judgments, including Rajnesh vs. Neha and Badshah vs. Urmila Badshah Godse, which emphasize the need for purposive interpretation of maintenance provisions to achieve social justice.
The court warned that any non-compliance with the maintenance order could result in coercive action to realize the maintenance amount.
The revision was partly allowed with specific directions.
Case Title: Shilpy Sharma vs. Rahul Sharma
!["No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment]](/secure/uploads/2020/01/lj_4995_Allahabad_HC_AZAN.jpg)
