‘Marriage Is A Partnership Of Equals, Wives Are Not Deemed Maids’: Bombay HC

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has held that a wife’s failure to perform daily household chores such as cooking and cleaning does not automatically constitute mental cruelty, setting aside a family court’s decree of divorce granted on that ground and awarding the wife Rs. 10,000 per month as maintenance and Rs. 10,000 per month towards residential accommodation.

A Division Bench of Justice Bharti Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande delivered the judgment on May 8, 2026, holding that “mere failure of a wife to do chores such as cooking and cleaning does not automatically amount to cruelty, as marriage is a partnership of equals and not a service contract, and wives are not deemed maids.”

The parties were married in 2002. Within days, the husband alleged that disputes arose, and within months, the wife returned to her parents’ home. In 2004, the husband, a Chartered Accountant, filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty. His allegations included that the wife was not behaving properly, was not doing household work, was disobedient towards his parents, was rude in her behaviour, was unable to cook, and had caused him mental stress, all of which he characterised as amounting to cruelty.

The wife denied refusing to do domestic work and instead claimed that she was made to do all household chores, including washing utensils and clothes, cooking, and cleaning, and was also made to eat leftover food. She argued that, as a legally wedded wife, she was entitled to decent maintenance and residential accommodation befitting the husband’s status. Concurrently, the wife had also filed a petition seeking maintenance and residential accommodation.

In 2010, the Bandra Family Court granted a decree of divorce in favour of the husband and also denied maintenance to the wife. The family court’s denial of maintenance was based on a solitary advertisement for art and craft classes issued by the wife, treating it as proof of an independent income.

The High Court held that the allegations against the wife were general in nature and were of the kind usually made by parties to a marriage during the initial period of adjustment. It held that this ordinary wear and tear of marriage had been given undue weightage and treated as cruelty. The court found that the family court had failed to appreciate that the wife had left her matrimonial home due to harassment by the husband and his family members.

On the question of maintenance, the court held that the 2010 family court order denying maintenance was based entirely on the art and craft class advertisement and that there was no material to indicate that such activity translated into a regular or sufficient source of income. “Mere possession of a skill or sporadic engagement cannot be equated with a stable source of livelihood,” the court held. Given that the husband possessed professional qualifications as a Chartered Accountant and had the earning capacity to maintain her, the court directed him to pay maintenance of Rs. 10,000 per month and a further Rs. 10,000 per month towards the wife’s residential accommodation.

The court accordingly set aside the 2010 Bandra Family Court decree of divorce as well as the order denying maintenance.

Case Details

• Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay
• Bench: Justice Bharti Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande
• Date of Judgment: May 8, 2026