Kerala High Court Deprecates 'Clever Attempts' Made By Qualified Persons To Establish Less Income In Maintenance Proceedings

The Kerala High Court on Monday deprecated attempts made by qualified persons to establish less income by producing salary certificates issued from private entrepreneurs, without opportunity to the other side to cross-examine the author of the document, in order to avoid paying maintenance to wife and children. 

The Single Judge Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed that courts shall consider the entire evidence, the professional or other qualifications, otherwise the physical condition and all other attenuating circumstances of the husband/respondent, while quantifying the maintenance allowance.

"Clever attempts of qualified persons to establish less income by producing salary certificates issued from private entrepreneurs, without opportunity to the other side to cross-examine the author of the document to test its genesis, shall not be the sole basis of considering the income of the husband/respondent in a maintenance petition and such certificates alone shall not be decisive in determining the income also. The courts shall consider the entire evidence, the professional or other qualifications, otherwise the physical condition and all other attenuating circumstances of the husband/respondent, while quantifying the maintenance allowance".

The respondents who are the wife and minor child of the revision petitioner had approached the Family Court for grant of maintenance. Arguing that the revision petitioner was an Automobile Mechanic who had been earning Rs.50,000/- per month, and had landed properties, the respondents sought maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.4,000/- respectively. This was in turn, disputed by the respondent, and it was contended that he was only assisting his uncle, who was doing business of ayurverdic herbs and was getting Rs.8,000/- per month.

The Family Court accordingly, granted maintenance to the respondents herein at the rate of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.4,000/- respectively to the wife and minor child of the revision petitioner, respectively. It is against the same that the instant revision petition has been filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act read with Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. 

On behalf of the revision petitioner, it was contended by Advocate T.N. Manoj that the revision petitioner had produced the salary certificate, showing his monthly income to the tune of Rs.12,000/- before the Family Court and the Court had failed to take note of that aspect while fixing the quantum of maintenance as Rs.9,000/- per month. He also relief upon the Apex Court decision in Akanksha Jain v. Manish Jain to contend that the quantum of maintenance shall be reasonable amount after taking into consideration the income of the spouses and the needs of the claimants having regard to the status of the parties, the family background, the standard of living to which the claimant has been accustomed, legal and other obligations of the person liable to make the payment and other relevant circumstances.

On the other hand, it was submitted by Advocate Siraj Karoly on behalf of the respondent that the revision petitioner had produced a salary certificate before the Family Court during November, 2019 showing his salary to the tune of Rs.16,000/-, and during evidence, he produced another salary certificate showing his income at Rs.12,000/-. It was argued that, "a physically able bodied person is legally and morally bound to maintain his wife and children and the obligation is more when he is professionally qualified". It was pointed out that merely by producing a salary certificate issued by a private concern, without examining the authors and proving its contents by subjecting themselves to cross examination, the said salary certificates could not be sufficient to hold the income of the revision petitioner as had been shown in the certificates. The counsel pointed out the benevolent nature of Section 125 Cr.P.C. would also point that the attempts by the revision petitioner to establish less income, based on salary certificates issued by private concerns ought to be deprecated. The counsel further submitted that the revision petitioner was professionally qualified and a Mechanical Engineering Diploma holder. 

The court perused a plethora of case laws and discerned that the legal position was well settled that the amount of maintenance fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in reasonable comfort considering her status and the mode of life she was used to when she lived with her husband and also that she does not feel handicapped in the prosecution of her case, although not excessive or extortionate. The Court also took note that merely because the wife is earning money, it could not be a ground to reject the claim for maintenance.

 It is in this context that the Court held that the entire evidence, the professional or other qualifications, and all other attenuating circumstance ought to be considered while quantifying maintenance, while expressing strong disapproval of the practice of producing salary certificates issued by private entrepreneurs in order to establish less income. 

The Court thus discerned that the Family Court had thus arrived at the decision after evaluating the materials available, and finding that the respondents did not have any means of maintenance. 

The Court found that only the minimum amount of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.4,000/- was granted as maintenance to the respondents and the said amount could not be held as on higher side, in any way. 

The Revision petitioner was thereby directed to clear the entire arrears from the date of petition till that of the order, within a period of one month from today, and on failure to do so, the respondents were granted liberty to file a proper application before the Family Court to execute the sentence, in accordance with law.

Case Title: Amaldev v. Preeja & Anr. 

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 659

Click Here To Read/Download The Order