Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Income Tax Returns Do Not Necessarily Furnish an Accurate Guide of the Real Income: Gujarat High Court in Maintenance Revision Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Gujarat, under the bench of Honourable Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi, dismissed a revision application challenging a Family Court’s order for maintenance. The husband’s application, made under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C., contested the monthly maintenance of Rs. 40,000 awarded to his wife and daughter.

The core legal issue involved the assessment of maintenance, focusing on the husband’s income and the wife’s earning capacity. The husband’s appeal centered around his alleged inability to pay the determined maintenance and questioning the wife’s earning potential.

The revision application arose from an earlier Family Court order mandating the husband to pay maintenance. The husband argued that his income was insufficient for such maintenance and that his wife, being qualified and previously employed, could sustain herself.

The court scrutinized the husband’s income, considering his possible underreporting and the absence of substantial evidence regarding the wife’s current employment status.

Emphasis was placed on the husband’s responsibility under Section 106 of the Evidence Act to reveal his true income.

The judgment referred to multiple precedents to emphasize the importance of a comprehensive assessment of evidence in maintenance cases.

Recognizing the tendency to underreport income in matrimonial disputes, the Court highlighted the need for a realistic assessment of the husband’s earnings.

The Court deliberated on various factors, including the standard of living during the marriage and the financial status of both parties.

Decision: The High Court upheld the Family Court’s order, dismissing the revision application. The Court found no merit in the husband’s plea under the constrained revisional jurisdiction of Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C.

Date of Decision: 21/03/2024.

MEGHRAJSINH VS MEGHAVINIBA

Similar News