High Court of Delhi Judgment on Maintenance Dispute

High Court of Delhi

Background:

On 22nd February 2024, the High Court of Delhi, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla, addressed a petition filed by a husband challenging the order dated 15th December 2021 by the Family Courts at Karkardooma, Delhi. The Family Court had directed the husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000 per month to his wife and Rs. 12,000 per month to their child.

Husband's Argument:

The husband, represented by Advocates Ms. Anubha Dhulia and Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, argued that his income was inaccurately assessed by the Family Court. Despite submitting affidavits showing an income of Rs. 14,000 to Rs. 24,000 per month, the Family Court determined his income to be Rs. 70,000 per month, allegedly based on conjectures.

Court's Observations:

Justice Chawla observed that in matrimonial litigation, there is often an attempt by both parties to misrepresent their true incomes. While husbands may underreport to minimize maintenance payments, wives may inflate claims. Given the conflicting claims, courts must rely on available evidence and some degree of guesswork. In this case, the Family Court considered the husband’s activities as a musician and music academy operator, concluding his income to be Rs. 70,000 per month.

Judgment:

The High Court of Delhi found no fault in this assessment but noted that the employment status of the wife had changed. She had recently begun working at Vanasthali Public School, although this employment was stated to be temporary. Given this new development, Justice Chawla directed that the husband could file an application for modification of the interim maintenance order based on his wife’s employment. The husband was also instructed to clear all arrears of maintenance within eight weeks. Until the Family Court adjudicates the new application, the husband is to pay Rs. 12,000 per month as interim maintenance.

Conclusion:

This judgment underscores the complexity of maintenance disputes and the necessity for courts to navigate incomplete or contradictory financial disclosures to ensure fair outcomes.