From Monthly Allowance To Property Transfer: Supreme Court Lays Down New Alimony Rules

In a landmark decision that could reshape how Indian courts approach spousal support, the Supreme Court has raised the bar on alimony, both literally and conceptually. At the heart of the judgment lies a case that’s spanned 17 years, involving Rakhi Sadhukhan and her former husband, Raja Sadhukhan. Their divorce was finalised in 2019, but the legal fight over maintenance dragged on, until now.

The top court has increased Rakhi’s monthly alimony from Rs 20,000 to Rs 50,000 with a built-in 5 per cent hike every two years.

More significantly, it upheld the transfer of their jointly owned marital home to her, signaling a shift from seeing maintenance as merely a monthly cheque, to a broader, more sustainable view of what it takes to ensure post-divorce dignity and stability.

Why this matters

Rakhi’s case isn't just another alimony dispute, it shows how courts have traditionally handled support for separated women, too slowly and narrowly. The key questions arising out of alimony cases always center around: Does the maintenance decided per the law keeps up with the inflation or reflects the lifestyle of the woman during the marriage?

The Supreme Court, however, has caught up with these questions.

By linking alimony to lifestyle and future inflation, not just subsistence, the court has laid down new principles that many believe will guide future maintenance orders. It also made it clear that additional responsibilities, like children from a second marriage or caring for aging parents, cannot be used to dilute a husband’s obligations to his former spouse.

What was this case?

The couple married in 1997 and separated in 2007. For years, Rakhi received interim maintenance that gradually increased from Rs 8,000 to Rs 20,000 per month. But with inflation and her ex-husband’s improved financial situation, she argued that this was not enough to support a life close to what she had during their marriage.

In 2023, when Raja failed to appear in court, the Supreme Court passed an ex parte order hiking her interim maintenance to Rs 75,000. Eventually, the court settled on Rs 50,000 as permanent alimony with a clause for automatic hikes every two years.

The Court said the amount must reflect “the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage” and provide “reasonable security” for her future.

Property as alimony?

A striking part of the verdict is the direction to transfer the marital home to Rakhi. In cities where rent is often unaffordable and women may not have stable income after divorce, a home equals long-term security.

Instead of relying entirely on monthly payouts, the court has expanded the toolkit: if the husband has immovable property but limited cash flow, real estate can serve as an alternate form of maintenance.

It also reduces the need for continued court oversight, ensuring the dependent spouse is not left vulnerable to defaults or future disputes.

How did SC decide on Spouse's ability to pay?

This case has also set a precedent on how courts assess a spouse’s ability to pay. The judgment digs deeper than the declared salary. It considers the earning spouse’s full financial potential, past earnings, lifestyle, assets, and even possible underreporting. This may make it harder for payers to manipulate income documents or claim new responsibilities as excuses to reduce payments.

The court has effectively warned that earning capacity cannot be hidden behind technicalities and that any attempt to do so might backfire. As seen here, non-appearance led to a sharp interim hike. Prolonged litigation may end up costing more than settling early.

The Inflation Clause

The 5 per cent biennial increase might seem like a small addition but it’s actually one of the most progressive parts of this ruling.

Until now, maintenance orders often remained static for years unless specifically revised. That meant the burden of chasing fairness was placed back on the dependent spouse, usually through fresh litigation.

Now, with an automatic inflation adjustment, the support evolves without requiring new court battles.

This ruling may likely become a benchmark in future maintenance cases. Courts may now start treating lifestyle as the central factor in alimony. They may also increasingly ask for full income disclosure, salary slips, IT returns, property records, and more to arrive at a just amount.

The court has also clarified that the inheritance and maintenance are not the same. Divorce does not affect a child’s right to ancestral property. That distinction helps untangle some of the most confusing and emotionally charged parts of family litigation.