Maintenance Cannot Be Denied To Wife Merely Because She Is Educated: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court observed that merely because a wife is educated, the same alone is not a ground to deny her maintenance.
The Court was hearing a petition challenging the judgment passed by the Family Court that had awarded maintenance to Respondent under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Additionally, the maintenance amount is set to increase by 10% every two years due to inflation, and litigation expenses were granted.
The bench of Justice Amit Mahajan observed, “Merely because Respondent No.2 is educated, the same alone is not a ground to deny her maintenance.”
Advocate Deepak Mayur appeared for the Appellant and APP Pradeep Gahalot appeared for the Respondent.
The Court noted that it is well settled that the object of granting maintenance is to prevent vagrancy by compelling those who can provide support to those who are unable to support themselves and who have a moral claim to support.
The Court mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court in Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008) and quoted, “The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It provides a speedy remedy for the supply of food, clothing and shelter to the deserted wife. It gives effect to fundamental rights and natural duties of a man to maintain his wife, children and parents when they are unable to maintain themselves.”
The Court noted that a wife cannot be disentitled from claiming any maintenance merely because she seeks divorce after having left the company of her husband due to sufficient reasons.
The Court relied on the decision in Kiran Tomar v. State of U.P.: 2022 and observed, “…there is a tendency to downplay the income when a person is embroiled in a matrimonial dispute and that even income tax returns do not necessarily provide an accurate reflection of the actual income in such cases.”
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the present Petition.
