Delhi High Court on the Maintenance under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 2005

18 September 2023 · Advocate Rajiv Rajpurohit

Recently the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has given a very important order/Judgment in favor of the husband. The judgment was passed on September 12, 2023. The case involved a wife challenging an order of the learned family court, which had rejected her application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. That husband has filed a divorce petition against her and subsequently divorce petition was withdrawn on the grounds of an amicable solution. The husband tried to settle the matter amicably, but after a few months, the wife filed a false police complaint against him. The husband then filed a second divorce petition in the Family Court. The wife preferred a claim for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in the second divorce petition, but the family court dismissed it. In this particular case, the wife is highly qualified. She had an M.Phil degree at the time of marriage and holds a Ph.D. in management. She also had a professional qualification in computers. The husband, on the other hand, was a simple graduate. At the time of marriage, he was working in a diamond jeweler showroom and earning a salary of Rs. 12,000 per month. The court considered that the wife was not only highly qualified but was also working at the time of marriage. The wife had specifically mentioned that she was unemployed, but the husband had produced a CD showing that she was working in the office of a Member of Parliament. The court held that a person who is highly qualified cannot sit idle and expect maintenance from her husband. The court also agreed with the observation of the learned family court that there is a difference between the capacity to earn and actual earning. In the present case, it was on record that the wife had been working. The court also discussed the classic judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Mamta Jaiswal v. Rajesh Jaiswal. In that case, the Madhya Pradesh High Court had observed that the purpose of providing monetary assistance to either spouse is to support them in spite of sincere efforts. The law does not allow a person engaged in a legal battle to remain idle with the objective of squeezing out money from the opposite party. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is not meant to create an army of idle people waiting for a dole to be awarded by the other spouse. In another case, Rupali Gupta v. Rajat Gupta, the court had deprecated the claim of maintenance. 1955, is not meant to create an army of idle people waiting for a dole to be awarded by the other spouse. In another case, Rupali Gupta v. Rajat Gupta, the court had deprecated the claim of maintenance. Finally, the Honorable High Court of Delhi held that in the present case, the wife not only had the capacity to earn but had also not disclosed her true income truthfully. Therefore, she was not entitled to maintenance.