- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Delhi High Court
- /
- Wife Working To Supplement Her...
Wife Working To Supplement Her Daily Expenditure Amid Non-Payment By Husband No Ground To Reduce Maintenance: Delhi High Court
Nupur Thapliyal
27 Sept 2023 11:40 AM IST
The Delhi High Court has observed that if a wife starts working to supplement daily expenditure for herself and the child due to financial crunch, it is not a ground to reduce maintenance payable to her by her husband. A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed a husband’s appeal challenging a family court order refusing to modify...
The Delhi High Court has observed that if a wife starts working to supplement daily expenditure for herself and the child due to financial crunch, it is not a ground to reduce maintenance payable to her by her husband.
A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed a husband’s appeal challenging a family court order refusing to modify monthly maintenance of Rs. 8,000 to the wife and Rs. 3,000 for the minor child.
“Even though the interim maintenance has been granted, the appellant is in arrears of about Rs. 4,67,000/- and the appellant/husband has not been making payment of interim maintenance. Faced with such a financial crunch, if the respondent (wife) has started working and generated some source of income which is admittedly about Rs. 10,000/- per month to supplement day-to-day expenditure of herself and the daughter, it cannot be considered as a ground to reduce the maintenance,” the court observed.
The husband had sought reduction in maintenance amount on the ground that his earnings were reduced due to COVID-19 pandemic and that the wife had started earning. He also claimed that the wife had concealed the fact of her employment and earnings.
Dismissing the appeal, the court observed, “The efforts of the respondent to meet her expenses by creating some source of income in the sum of Rs.6,000 to Rs.10,000/- where the husband has failed to discharge his obligations of paying the maintenance and is in arrears of more than Rs.4,67,000/-, cannot be considered as a reason to modify/ reduce the interim maintenance,” the court said.
Advocate Mohd. Faisal appeared for the appellant.
Advocates Abhay Mani Tripathi and Hemant Gulati appeared for respondent.