Wife's earning capacity can't be assumed for interim maintenance: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court said interim maintenance cannot be denied on assumptions about a wife's income without proof, enhancing a woman's monthly allowance from ₹2,500 to ₹3,500

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a wife cannot be presumed to be earning or capable of maintaining herself while deciding interim maintenance unless there is prima facie evidence to support such a claim.

 

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation while hearing a woman’s plea challenging a family court order that granted her ₹2,500 per month as interim maintenance. The judgment was delivered on January 5, reported PTI.

 

The court rejected the husband’s claim that the woman was working as a nursery teacher, noting that no documented proof had been placed on record. It observed that the wife had studied only up to Class 11 and said a “mere bald assertion” without evidence could not be relied upon.

 

 

“For the purposes of grant of interim maintenance, the petitioner-wife cannot be presumed to be earning or being capable of maintaining herself,” the court said, adding that claims of employment or income must be supported by at least prima facie material.

 

Holding that the interim maintenance awarded by the family court was inadequate, the high court enhanced the amount to ₹3,500 per month and directed the husband to clear arrears within three months.

 

What is the case about?

 

According to PTI, the couple got married in June 2021 as per Muslim rites and ceremonies. The wife alleged that she was subjected to cruelty over dowry demands soon after marriage and was turned out of the matrimonial home in 2022.

 

She later approached the family court under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), seeking maintenance. In March 2024, the family court awarded her ₹2,500 per month as interim maintenance.

 

Plea for enhancement

 

Challenging the amount, the woman told the high court that her husband was a graduate working as a teacher in a private school and earning around ₹25,000 per month.

 

She further alleged that he earned an additional ₹15,000 per month by giving private tuition, besides income from running a grocery shop and earning rental income of about ₹30,000 per month. She argued that the interim maintenance awarded was insufficient.

 

The husband countered the claims, stating that he worked as a teacher and special educator with an NGO and earned only ₹10,000 per month.

 

High court assesses husband's income

 

The high court observed that the income claimed by the husband was even lower than the minimum wages prescribed for a skilled graduate worker.

 

It noted that he also failed to file complete bank account statements and produced records only for a limited period, which did not show regular salary credits of ₹10,000 per month as claimed.

 

In the absence of reliable proof of his actual earnings, the court assessed his income on the basis of minimum wages. It noted that at the relevant time, minimum wages for a graduate or skilled worker in Uttar Pradesh, where the husband lives and works were about ₹13,200 per month.

 

Taking into account the assessed income, the status of the parties and the fact that the wife had no independent source of income, the High Court held that the interim maintenance fixed by the family court was on the lower side and required enhancement.