Dignity Of Dependent Wife & Child Is Denied When Financial Support Is Delayed By Husband: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the dignity of a dependent wife and child is denied when the financial support is delayed by the husband, underscoring that even a day's lapse defeats the very purpose of maintenance.

“The very object of maintenance is defeated if its disbursal is left at the convenience of the earning spouse. Financial support delayed is dignity denied, and this Court is conscious of the fact that timely maintenance is integral to safeguarding not only subsistence but the basic dignity of those who are legally entitled to such support,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.

The Court observed that maintenance is not merely a monetary obligation but a legal and moral duty designed to preserve the dignity and security of the dependent spouse and child.

“The very object of maintenance under the statutory framework is to ensure financial stability and a sense of security for the dependent spouse and child. Maintenance is intended to safeguard their right to live with dignity and meet basic expenses such as food, shelter, clothing, healthcare, and education. It is not a benevolence or charity to be delayed at the convenience of the earning spouse,” the Court said.

Justice Sharma was dealing with a husband's plea challenging a family court order directing him to pat Rs. 45,000 to the wife and the minor child per month.

The Court noted that the husband failed to place on record any material to demonstrate that the wife had any independent source of income. It said that there was no document, affidavit, or income proof filed to indicate that the wife was engaged in any gainful employment or possesses any financial resources of her own.

The Court further noted that the husband's claim regarding his parents being financially dependent upon him was completely unsupported by any documentary evidence.

The Court also took note of the fact that EMIs were being paid by the husband towards his ancestral house. On this, Justice Sharma observed that the statutory right of the wife and child to receive maintenance cannot be defeated on account of EMIs that the husband was paying towards any property.

“This Court notes that while the petitioner (husband) continues to sleep in peace, secure in the knowledge of his regular income and resources, the respondent (wife) suffers in silence, grappling with uncertainty and anxiety about how she will meet her basic needs if maintenance is not paid in a timely manner. The hardship faced by a dependent spouse or child is not measured merely by the quantum of arrears but by the immediate consequences of financial deprivation that even short delays in maintenance can cause,” the Court said.

It added realitythat even a day's uncertainty over basic expenses causes distress and hardship to the wife, who was entirely dependent on the maintenance for her survival and for providing for the minor child.

The Court modified the impugned order to the extent that the interim maintenance payable to the wife shall remain to be Rs. 22,500 per month, however, the minor child shall be entitled to interim maintenance of Rs. 17,500 per month.

Title: X v. Y

Click here to read order