Able-Bodied Husband Can't Argue That He Isn't In Position To Maintain His Wife: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that an able-bodied husband cannot argue that he is not in a position to maintain his wife.

The observation was made while dismissing an appeal filed by the Husband against the order passed by the family court under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act [Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings] in a proceeding for divorce instituted by the husband.

Our readers may note that Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for maintenance pendente lite, where the Court may direct the respondent to pay the expenses of the proceeding and pay such reasonable monthly amount, which is considered to be reasonable, having regard to the income of both the parties.

It essentially makes a provision for an award of interim maintenance to a spouse who has no independent income sufficient to support her and fight the legal battle.

Now, in the instant case, the Husband had moved the High Court challenging the order of the family court directing the husband to pay Rs. 3000/- per month towards interim maintenance to the respondent-wife as well as Rs. 5000/- towards the cost of the proceeding.

He argued before the Court that he is unemployed and he has no source of income and that the respondent-wife has independent income as she is running a medical store along with his father who is a doctor.

In view of this, at the outset, the bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Om Prakash Shukla observed that the mere fact that the respondent-wife is educated and is doing something to survive since she has been thrown out of her matrimonial home cannot be a reason to deny interim maintenance.

"An able-bodied husband cannot argue that he is not in a position to maintain his wife. It is social, legal and morale responsibility of a man to maintain his wife and no exception to the same can be taken by us, in view of bald assertions of the appellant," the Court further remarked.

Lastly, referring to the decision of the Apex Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha 2021 (2) SCC 324 and noticing the law of maintenance as discussed by the Apex Court therein, the Court did not find any good ground to entertain the appeal. The appeal was thus, dismissed at the admission stage itself.

In the year 2017, the High Court of Kerala had quashed a husband's claim for maintenance, observing that maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is to be paid to the husband only when he is able to prove any incapability or handicap.

The Bench comprising Justice A.M. Shaffique and Justice K. Ramakrishnan further observed that in the absence of such circumstances, endowing maintenance on the husbands would promote "idleness" among them.

Case title - Vaibhav Singh v. Smt. Divyashika Singh [FIRST APPEAL No. - 554 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 393

Click Here To Read/Download Order