Self-Declared Information On Matrimonial Site Not Admissible Proof Of Income: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that any “self-declared information” made on a matrimonial portal, without verification or corroborative evidence, cannot be treated as reliable or admissible proof of income. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that a court of law cannot rely upon a declaration made by a person on a matrimonial website.The bench thus rejected a wife's plea challenging a...
The Delhi High Court has observed that any “self-declared information” made on a matrimonial portal, without verification or corroborative evidence, cannot be treated as reliable or admissible proof of income.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that a court of law cannot rely upon a declaration made by a person on a matrimonial website.
The bench thus rejected a wife's plea challenging a family court order directing the husband to pay Rs. 12,500 per month from the date of filing of the petition till December 31, 2012, and Rs. 24,000 per month from January 01, 2013 till February 22, 2016- till the date of her remarriage.
It was the wife's case that the husband had represented on the matrimonial website Jeevansathi.com that his annual income exceeded ₹10 lakhs, which ought to have been given due weightage while determining the quantum of maintenance.
On the other hand, the husband argued that the wife's reliance on Jeevansathi.com to allege that he earned Rs. 10 lakhs annually was misplaced, as no corroborative documentary proof was filed by her.
The Court noted that the wife, during the pendency of the petition, had remarried, which was not disclosed by her during her cross examination before the Trial Court in the year 2023.
It said that despite the said suppression, the wife was seeking enhancement of maintenance on speculative grounds – being the husband's alleged declaration of income on a matrimonial website.
“This Court is of the considered opinion that any self-declared information made on a matrimonial portal, without verification or corroborative evidence, cannot be treated as reliable or admissible proof of income,” the Court said.
On wife's argument of presuming that the husband's income must have increased significantly over the years, the Court said that such assumptions are purely speculative.
“This Court is of the view that income trends can vary depending on various personal and professional circumstances, and cannot be presumed to have followed a linear upward trajectory without any documentary proof,” the Court said.
Title: A v. B