Recently, the Madras High Court set aside the order of the Family Court granting interim maintenance to the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, while upholding the award of maintenance to the minor son. The Court observed that Section 24 is meant to ensure sustenance of a spouse without sufficient income, but where the wife is already receiving substantial dividends and possesses valuable properties, further interim maintenance is unnecessary.
The case arose when a husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage before the Family Court in Chennai. During the pendency of the proceedings, the wife filed applications seeking interim maintenance for herself and her son, and also for the educational expenses of the child including NEET coaching fees. The Family Court directed the husband to pay monthly interim maintenance to both the wife and the son, and further to bear the child’s educational costs. While the husband complied with the educational expenses and accepted the maintenance awarded to his son, he challenged the order granting maintenance to his wife.
The counsel for the husband argued that the wife was financially independent and an affluent Director of a private company, regularly receiving significant dividends. It was further contended that she owned valuable immovable properties and had deliberately concealed her true income to claim maintenance. The counsel submitted that Section 24 is intended only to secure a basic standard of living for a dependent spouse, not to unjustly enrich one who is already self-sufficient.
On the other hand, counsel for the wife argued that the dividends received from the company were entirely spent on the son’s education, leaving her with no steady source of income. It was submitted that she had made full disclosure of her assets and liabilities and had not concealed any material fact. Counsel maintained that she was entitled to claim maintenance from her husband.
The Court, after examining the pleadings and evidence, held, “The object of awarding interim maintenance is only to ensure that the wife has sufficient income to enable her to maintain herself, and the said sustenance is not mere survival, but should be on the same lines of a comfortable lifestyle that she would have had in the matrimonial home". However, it noted that in the present case, the wife had received substantial amounts as dividends over the last few financial years and also owned immovable properties.
The Court observed that the settlement of property in favour of her father during the proceedings did not appear to be bona fide and seemed intended to overcome the husband’s objections regarding her affluence.
The Court further observed, “I do not see that the respondent is not possessed of such sufficient income already, warranting further monies from the petitioner by way of interim maintenance. In all fairness, the petitioner has stated that he is willing to meet the educational expenses of his son and has also complied with the order in respect of his son’s maintenance. In the light of the above, I am not able to sustain the order of the Family Court awarding interim maintenance to the wife, which is wholly unnecessary in the light of the substantial income that has accrued to her".
Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the revision petition, setting aside the award of interim maintenance to the wife, while upholding the direction to pay maintenance and educational expenses for the minor son.
Case Title: X Vs. Y
Case No: CRP.No. 2590 of 2025
Coram: Justice P.B.Balaji
Picture Source :
