Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has delivered a significant judgment upholding maintenance awarded to a working wife, emphasizing that earning capacity does not automatically disqualify a wife from receiving maintenance to maintain the standard of living she was accustomed to during the marriage.
The court of Justice Manjusha Deshpande was hearing a challenge filed against the Family Court’s order granting Rs. 15,000/- per month as maintenance to the wife. The court noted, “The petitioner-husband challenges the order passed on Interim Application No. 164 of 2021 in Petition No. A-1744 of 2019, pending before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai.”
Addressing the grounds of challenge, the court observed, “The petitioner-husband is challenging the said order on the ground that the respondent-wife is already employed and is earning an amount of Rs. 21,820/- per month.”
Highlighting the husband’s contentions, the court stated, “According to the petitioner, the monthly income of the respondent-wife is approximately Rs. 40,000/-. In the affidavit of assets and liabilities filed by the petitioner, he has disclosed that his gross salary is Rs. 65,774/-, and salary in hand is Rs. 57,935/-.”
In a critical observation regarding income disclosure, the court stated, “I find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has not disclosed his true income in the affidavit of assets and liabilities. The salary slips placed on record disclose his income to be above Rs. 1,00,000/-.”
Emphasizing the disparity in incomes and living standards, the court noted, “There is a huge disparity in the income of the petitioner and the respondent, which cannot be overlooked. The respondent-wife is certainly entitled to be maintained with the same standard of living as she was accustomed to before their separation.”
Regarding the determination of maintenance, the court referenced the Supreme Court’s judgment in Pravin Kumar Jain v. Anju Jain, stating, “The Hon’ble Supreme Court in this judgment has once again reiterated the guidelines for fixing the amount of maintenance.”
The court also addressed the principle of maintenance for working wives, observing, “In the present case, though the wife is earning, her income is not sufficient for her own maintenance, as she has to travel a long distance daily for her job.”
In its final and most significant ruling, the court stated that “merely because the wife is earning, she cannot be deprived of support from her husband to maintain the same standard of living to which she was accustomed in her matrimonial home.”
Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition, concluding, “I do not find the maintenance awarded by the Family Court to be unreasonable or excessive. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Family Court does not warrant interference.”
Mr. Shashipal Shankar, Advocate, appeared for the petitioner, while Mr. S. S. Dube, along with Mr. Nagendra Dube, Advocates, appeared for the respondent.
Case Title: S. P. S. vs. P. S. S.
![Husband Can Also Claim Alimony/Maintenance From Wife: Bombay High Court Orders Woman To Pay Alimony To Ex-Husband [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2022/04/lj_2823_Divorce.jpg)
