The Delhi High Court has reduced the interim maintenance for a wife. This concerns a matrimonial dispute between Ashutosh Rai Asthana and Yamita Rai Asthana.
The couple married on 2 November 1995 and had two children. Following marital differences, the wife filed for maintenance in 2021.
The Family Court initially granted her ₹25,000 monthly interim maintenance. Later, in 2024, this amount was increased to ₹30,000 monthly.
The husband challenged this enhanced amount before the Delhi High Court. Justice Saurabh Banerjee heard the revision petition, according to Raw Law.
Both children currently reside with their father, the court noted. He solely bears their educational and financial expenses currently. Their elder daughter is pursuing an expensive MBBS course.
Meanwhile, the wife lives alone in a three-bedroom property. This property was purchased by and belongs to her husband.
She holds an MBA in Finance, along with qualifications in astrology. She also receives independent income from two separate sources, Raw Law reported.
She earns ₹10,450 monthly through rental income. She also receives around ₹4,400 monthly as fixed-deposit interest.
The husband argued the Family Court had ignored these crucial financial circumstances. He said his wife’s qualifications made her capable of self-support.
He also highlighted his own financial responsibilities towards both children. This included his daughter’s costly MBBS education expenses.
He cited existing loans and financial liabilities requiring regular repayment. He argued maintenance shouldn’t rely solely on his income.
The wife countered by highlighting her husband’s substantial annual income. His tax returns showed income exceeding ₹63 lakh annually, according to Raw Law. She argued that the Family Court had already properly considered all relevant factors.
The Delhi High Court examined established legal principles governing the determination of maintenance. It referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rajnesh vs Neha.
This ruling outlines several factors courts must consider holistically. These include both parties’ status, needs, income and existing liabilities.
The court emphasised that maintenance isn’t meant to punish past behaviour. Instead, it prevents vagrancy for those unable to support themselves.
According to Raw Law, Section 125 CrPC exists specifically for social justice purposes, the court noted. It protects women and children who lack sufficient means.
The High Court identified several factors that the Family Court had overlooked. Both children’s residence with their father was significant, it said.
The wife’s exclusive access to valuable accommodation also mattered considerably. Her financial qualifications and existing independent income were equally relevant factors.
Notably, before formal maintenance was awarded, the husband voluntarily paid ₹20,000 monthly. This showed that reasonable support was already being provided.
The court acknowledged that the husband possessed substantial financial means overall. However, this alone couldn’t override other relevant considerations, it clarified.
A proper balance was needed between both parties’ rights and responsibilities. This would preserve the underlying social purpose of maintenance laws.
Delhi High Court’s judgment
Ultimately, the Delhi High Court reduced the monthly maintenance amount. It lowered the figure from ₹30,000 back to ₹25,000.
This reduced amount applies retroactively from 12 April 2021. This marks the date when the maintenance application was originally filed.
The court concluded the Family Court hadn’t given sufficient weight. Specifically, it overlooked the wife’s qualifications, income and accommodation benefits.
The husband’s responsibility for both children’s welfare also warranted greater consideration. The revision petition was thus disposed of accordingly by the court.