The Delhi High Court highlighted the gender-neutral nature of maintenance provisions under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA). The division bench comprising Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta delivered the verdict in response to an appeal challenging a family court order
Brief Facts of the Case:
The case involved an appeal by Chetram Mali against a family court order directing him to pay Rs 30,000 per month to his wife, Karishma Saini, from the initiation of the divorce petition until its disposal, along with litigation expenses amounting to Rs 51,000.
Contentions of the Parties:
The appellant represented by Mr. Aditya Gaur and Krishan Bhardwaj, contested the order, arguing that the maintenance amount was increased from Rs 21,000, initially awarded under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘PWDV Act’), without any substantial change in circumstances. The appellant asserted that he is the sole earner supporting his siblings and aged parents and had additionally borrowed a loan for his brother's marriage.
On the other hand, Karishma Saini maintained that despite claiming no independent source of income, she possesses a reasonable educational background as a graduate from Delhi University. The respondent's voluntary engagement in social work was highlighted, indicating a capacity for meaningful employment.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the respondent, despite claiming no independent source of income, holds a reasonable educational background as a graduate from Delhi University. The Court observed that she has voluntarily engaged in social work, suggesting a capacity for meaningful employment. Considering these factors, the bench, after analyzing the parties' financial details and affidavits, concluded that the maintenance pendente lite at the rate of ₹21,000 per month, as awarded in the PWDV Act proceedings, would be reasonable. The Court also directed the appellant to pay the litigation expenses/arrears in line with the family Court’s order.
In its broader pronouncement, the Court emphasized the gender-neutral nature of Sections 24 and 25 of the HMA stating that these provisions outline the rights, liabilities, and obligations arising from the marriage between the parties under the Act
Decision of the Court:
Additionally, taking into account inflation and rising prices, the High Court modified the maintenance amount for the divorce proceedings. The appellant would now be required to pay ₹22,500 per month from January 01, 2024, with a subsequent increase to ₹24,000 per month from January 01, 2025, and so forth until the disposal of the divorce petition.
Case Title: Chetram Mali vs. Karishma Saini
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Mr. Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
Case No.: MAT.APP.(F.C.) 196/2023, CM. APPL. Nos.34480 & 34482/2023
Advocates of the Appellant: Mr. Aditya Gaur and Mr. Krishan Bhardwaj, Advocates.
Advocates of the Respondent: Mr. Sachin Bansal, Ms. Arti Sharma, Ms. Sakshi Mahajan and Mr. Gaurav Chauhan, Advocates
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :