Apex Court asks man to pay enhanced maintenance amount as he left his wife and minor daughter ‘to fend for themselves’
Justices Vikram Nath & Satish Chandra Sharma [29-01-2024]

Read Order:  YAGWATI @ POONAM v. GHANSHYAM [SC- CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1318-1319 OF 2024]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, February 1, 2024:  Allowing an appeal of an aggrieved woman in a matrimonial dispute matter, the Supreme Court has enhanced the monthly maintenance amount from Rs 10,000 to Rs 20,000.

The Appellant, in this case, sought an enhancement of maintenance awarded by the High Court on the ground that the maintenance awarded by the High Court was inadequate and did not reflect the true financial capacity of the Respondent. The marriage between the Appellant and Respondent came to be solemnized in the year 1982 and thereafter 3 children came to borne out of the wedlock. Subsequently in 1998, the marriage encountered complications which led to the parties residing separately. The Respondent chose to reside with 2 of his major children and he left the Appellant and a minor child to fend for themselves.

The Respondent filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the HMA) seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties. An ex-parte decree came to be passed in favour of the Respondent and thereafter, he married another lady in the year 2007.

In the interregnum, the Appellant preferred an application before the Family Court, Jaipur seeking maintenance under Section 18 and Section 20 of the Act and the same was allowed. An application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (the CPC) came to be preferred by the Appellant and the ex-parte order decreeing the divorce in favour of the Respondent came to be set aside. The parties preferred cross-appeals.

The Division Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma  was considering the appeal which culminated out of a common order of Rajasthan High Court enhancing the award of maintenance granted to the Appellant by the Family Court at Jaipur under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 from Rs 3,000 per month to Rs 6,000 from the date of filing the application before the High Court up until 31.12.2005 and Rs 10,000 per month from 01.01.2006 onwards.

The Appellant submitted before the Court that the Respondent’s salary had increased significantly. Reliance was placed upon a Right to Information (RTI) application filed with BSNL, whereunder it was revealed that the Respondent was last drawing a handsome salary of Rs 1.05 lakh per month whilst serving as Assistant Manager, BSNL.

It was the case of the respondent that he had attained the age of superannuation and accordingly, no longer received the aforementioned salary. It was submitted that the Respondent was only drawing pension from BSNL and the maintenance granted by the High Court ought not to be interfered with.

Considering the position of the parties and the totality of circumstances surrounding the present appeals, the Bench asserted, “…we are of the considered view that the Appellant should be granted a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) per month as maintenance with effect from the date of this Order.”

Thus, the Bench allowed the appeal, enhanced the maintenance amount and alsi ordered that the arrears payable in respect of the maintenance due to the Appellant shall be payable in equal instalments by the Respondent in addition to the regular maintenance as quantified.