In a recent judgment delivered on September 14, 2023, the Court dismissed an appeal filed by the Wife, against an order dated April 27, 2019. The appeal, was heard by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna.
Background of the Case
The case revolved around a matrimonial dispute between the Wife and the Husband. The couple had entered into wedlock on November 23, 2016, and had a son, born on December 4, 2017. However, due to irreconcilable differences, the couple separated.
The husband, initiated divorce proceedings under Section 13 (1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA). The minor child remained in the custody of his mother/Wife. During the course of the legal proceedings, Wife had sought interim maintenance totaling Rs. 46,000 per month under Section 24 of HMA.
Family Court Decision
The Family Court considered the financial positions of both parties. The Wife, a qualified B.Tech Software Engineer, was working as a Senior Software Engineer at HCL at the time of the initial petition. Her monthly income was Rs. 40,000, which had reportedly increased to Rs. 70,000 at the time of the appeal. In contrast, the Husband, a B.Com (Hons.) graduate and CA IIB (Banking Sector) employee with Bank of Baroda, earned Rs. 53,000, which had subsequently increased to just over Rs. 1 lakh.
The court observed that both parties had been living separately since April 2017, were employed, and earned comparable salaries. Additionally, the Wife possessed savings and resources beyond her salary. Considering these factors, the court declined her request for interim maintenance, stating that she had sufficient means to support herself.
However, the court did grant a monthly maintenance of Rs. 7,000 to the minor child, recognizing that it is the joint responsibility of both parents to contribute physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially to ensure the child’s well-being and upbringing.
Appeal in Delhi High Court
Dissatisfied with the Family Court’s Decision, the Wife preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. However, the High Court found no infirmity in the Family Court’s order and subsequently dismissed the appeal. The judgment highlighted that the wife, with her substantial means, could not claim maintenance for herself. However, it emphasized the importance of the father’s contribution to the upbringing and well-being of the minor child.
Conclusion
This judgment by the Delhi High Court provides clarity on the matter of interim maintenance in divorce cases. It underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring that both parents contribute to the well-being of their child while also considering the financial independence of the parties involved.
