Delhi High Court Grants Maintenance To Wife Earning Over ₹1 Lakh Per Month, Cites 'Stark Financial Disparity' With Husband's Income

A division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Renu Bhatngar observed that the provision aims to ensure parity in lifestyle of the spouses, so that the financially weaker spouse is not prejudiced by the economic advantage of the other.

It thus granted maintenance to an Assistant Professor of Delhi University, earning over ₹1,00,000 a month, citing “stark” disparity with the husband's income and lifestyle.

The husband's annual income exceeds Rs. 1.5 crores (as reflected in his ITRs).

However, the Family Court had denied the woman's claim for maintenance and had only granted relief of Rs. 35,000/- per month in favour of the couple's daughter, residing in the wife's custody.

In the wife's appeal, the High Court however said the Family Court erred in treating the wife's income as sufficient without factoring in the qualitative difference between the economic statuses of the spouses. It observed,

“The financial self-sufficiency of the wife must be assessed not in absolute terms but relative to the standard of living maintained during the marriage. The objective of Section 24 of the HMA is to ensure that neither spouse suffers economic hardship or social disadvantage due to the breakdown of the marital relationship.”

The Respondent-husband contended that the object of Section 24 is not to create an “army of idle persons” or to allow a spouse to lead a lavish life at the expense of the other.

However, the High Court held,

“In assessing a claim under Section 24 of the HMA, the determinative test is not merely whether the wife is employed or capable of earning, but whether her income is sufficient to enable her to maintain the same standard of living as she was accustomed to during cohabitation.”

In the present case, the High Court said,

“The financial disparity between the parties is stark, the respondent earns nearly ten times the income of the appellant. The very purpose of interim maintenance is to strike a fair balance and ensure parity in lifestyle, so that the financially weaker spouse and the child are not prejudiced by the economic advantage of the other. The law is equally well settled that a claim for maintenance under Section 24 of the HMA is not defeated merely because the applicant is educated, theoretically capable of earning, or even in fact earning.”

As such, it enhanced the maintenance amount from Rs. 35,000/- to Rs. 1,50,000/- per month, cumulatively for both, the appellant and the child.

Appearance: Mr. R.S. Sahni, Ms. Jasmine Sahni & Ms. Ashmine Sahni, Advs. for Appellant; Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Mr. Shrestha, Mr. Rahul & Mrs. Sutapa Ghose, Advs. for Respondent

Case title: SB v. HB

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1085

Case no.: MAT.APP.(F.C.) 252/2024

Click here to read order