The Delhi High Court observed that “the omission, without any cogent explanation, cast a doubt on the genuineness of the wife's claim.” This case sheds another light on alimony related issues where the maintenance rights always come under scrutiny depending on varying individual cases.
Here's why this case is different: the High Court upheld that a child’s right to maintenance is independent of disputes between the parents.
A child’s right to financial support cannot be diluted by disputes between parents, the Delhi High Court has said, even as it refused to grant alimony to a woman who failed to produce evidence of her reduced income.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while hearing cross-petitions from both the husband and the wife, upheld a family court’s order that denied maintenance to the woman, but directed the man to pay Rs 16,000 a month towards their daughter’s upkeep.
What Was The Case
The couple, married in 2009, had a daughter born in 2010. The wife had sought Rs 30,000 as monthly maintenance – Rs 20,000 for herself and Rs 10,000 for the child, alleging that her husband earned about Rs 55,000 a month as a senior electrician with Northern Railways. The family court, however, allowed only the child’s claim, finding the woman had concealed her actual earnings.
During proceedings, she admitted previously drawing a salary of Rs 33,052 as a teacher in 2016, and disclosing her annual income in excess of Rs 4 lakh in her income tax return for 2017-18.
She later claimed her services were terminated and that she was working temporarily in a government school for just Rs 10,000 a month. But despite repeated opportunities, she failed to furnish recent salary slips or a Form-16 to prove the reduced income.
The Delhi High Court observed that “the omission, without any cogent explanation, cast a doubt on the genuineness of her claim,” and agreed that an adverse inference was justified.
Since the primary condition for claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, that the wife must be unable to maintain herself, was not established, her plea could not be sustained, the court said.
On the husband’s argument, however, that Rs 16,000 for the child was excessive, the High Court disagreed.
With his income of around Rs 58,000 a month, including agricultural earnings, the amount constituted roughly one-third of his salary. The court held this was reasonable to meet the educational, medical, and daily expenses of a growing child, adding: “A child’s right to maintenance is independent of the disputes between her parents, and the father is bound to maintain the children.”
Dismissing both petitions, the Delhi High Court reinforced two clear points – the lack of transparency on financial records can cost a spouse their claim to alimony. However, a child’s entitlement to support remains non-negotiable even if the wife is not eligible for maintenance.
