Maintenance for wife and kids not a banking transaction, its a legal, moral & religious duty: HC

In a recent ruling, the high court has underlined the significance of maintenance awarded to a wife and her children, stressing that it should not be equated to a financial transaction between a bank and its borrowers. As per a TOI report, the court declined to interfere with a family court's decision to grant Rs 15,000 per month as maintenance to the wife and her two children.

Justice Krishna S Dixit, in his order, highlighted the unique nature of this matter, stating, "In fact, the two children are being looked after by the respondent-wife herself. She has gone back to Shivamogga and has been residing with her natal family along with these children. These are very costly days, and Rs 15,000 is justifiably ordered as maintenance for all three collectively. In matters like this, what amount is claimed as maintenance pales into insignificance."

The case stemmed from a husband seeking a divorce and contesting a family court's decision on January 24, 2023, which favored his wife's maintenance application under section 125 of CrPC. The couple had been married for a decade but had faced irreconcilable differences. Subsequently, the wife had moved back to her hometown in Shivamogga, taking her two children with her.


The husband, a resident of Hoskote town, argued that he lacked the financial means to fulfill the maintenance order. However, Justice Dixit rebuffed this claim, emphasizing that providing for the maintenance of one's wife and children is not only a legal duty but also a religious and moral one.

The judge pointed out that the petitioner-husband failed to provide any evidence indicating that the respondent-wife was gainfully employed or had any source of income. "Even otherwise, the principal duty is on the shoulders of the man," the judge asserted.

Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in the Sadhana Lodh vs. National Insurance Company case, Justice Dixit highlighted the court's intent behind granting interim/permanent alimony. It is to ensure that the dependent spouse does not suffer destitution or vagrancy due to the breakdown of the marriage, rather than serving as a punitive measure against the other spouse. The judge concluded by emphasizing that there is no fixed formula for determining the quantum of maintenance to be awarded, citing another Supreme Court ruling (Ranjesh vs. Neha case).