Wife Having A Degree Of Higher Education Can't Be Basis To Disentitle Her To Maintenance: Madhya Pradesh High Court

A bench of Justice Prem Narayan Singh held so while upholding an order of the Family Court awarding maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to a wife.

In its order, the Court pointed out that Section 125 of CrPC is a piece of socialistic legislation which aims to improve the status of a needy lady in society.

“Inherent and immanent idea behind Section 125 of CrPC is to ameliorate the agony, anguish and financial suffering of a woman, who left her matrimonial home,” the Court said.

The Court added that in order to determine the quantum, a Judge has to figure out what is required by the wife to maintain a standard of living which is neither luxurious nor penurious, but it should be in accordance with the status of the family.

Essentially, the Court was dealing with a Criminal Revision plea filed by the Husband (Mohammed Nadeem) under Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 against the Family Court’s order directing him to pay his wife an amount of Rs. 10K per month as maintenance.

It was his contention in the revision plea that at the most, the respondent-wife resided with him for merely 18 months, therefore, he cannot be penalized for such a higher amount.

It was also argued that his wife holds an MBA Degree and currently, she is earning Rs.28,000/- per month while the income of the petitioner is only Rs.20,912/-.

In this regard, his counsel relied upon the Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of Niharika Ghosh Vs. Shankar Ghosh wherein the HC had ruled that a wife cannot be entitled to maintenance by the husband when she is highly qualified and has been earning even after her marriage, though she does not truthfully disclose her true income.

High Court’s observation

At the outset, the Court opined that if a wife has a degree of higher education, it cannot be ascertained that she is able to maintain herself.

The Court further noted that the petitioner himself had relinquished his wife without any reason and hence, it found the allegations regarding the fact that she is residing voluntarily with her parents to be baseless.

Regarding the maintenance amount, the Court referred to Apex Court’s judgment in the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhary Vs. Rita Dey Chowdhary Nee Nandy wherein it was observed that 25% of the income of the husband would be just and proper and not more than that.

Further, the bench also noted that the petitioner’s wife was earlier working, however, currently, she is unemployed. Furthermore, the Court observed that as per the salary certificate of the petitioner, it could be assumed that he was getting nearly Rs. 40,000/- as his salary.

In view of this, the Court did not find any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. Therefore, it did not interfere with the same.

Case title – MN vs. T

Case Citation:

Click Here To Read/Download Order