Indore: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the law on maintenance for neglected wives does not intend to create “an army of idle or inactive people” living off the income of the husband.
The court, while deciding a maintenance case filed by wife against husband, said, “Section 125 of CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) has not been constituted to create an army of idle or inactive people waiting for maintenance to be awarded from the income of the other spouse.”
Well-qualified spouses should not remain idle based on their maintenance amount received from their husband: HC
The court added, “Well qualified spouses should not be left idle or to remain idle basing on their maintenance amount received from their husband.”
These observations of the Madhya Pradesh High Court are a part of a judgment delivered by it where it reduced the maintenance awarded to a wife who was living apart from her husband from Rs 60,000 per month to Rs 40,000 per month.
Maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic: High Court
The court while reducing the maintenance amount payable to the wife relied on judgment of the Supreme Court of India where the top court had fixed maintenance payable to a wife at 25 per cent of the income of the husband and said that the maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic, and avoid either of the two extremes i.e. maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be so extravagant which becomes oppressive and unbearable for the respondent, nor should it be so meager that it drives the wife to penury.
What is the case?
In the case before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the issue was that a wife who was living at her maternal home in Indore despite being married and her husband lived in Dubai, had sought enhancement of maintenance fixed by the family court at Rs 60,000 per month.
Looking at the facts of the case, the court held, “In the case at hand, the wife is well qualified, she has Masters degree in Commerce and also done Shipping and Trading Diploma Course, thus she has earning capacity and therefore the exorbitant maintenance should not be awarded to her. It can be assumed that she can easily earn a good income by indulging herself in any work or business. Neither a married woman is debarred from doing job, nor a married woman living separately and also obtaining maintenance from her husband is prevented to employ herself and to earn some income for her livelihood.”
