Accused Loses Right To Default Bail By Acquiescence If Extension Orders Are Challenged Only After Chargesheet Filing: Supreme Court AP High Court Orders Release Of Vehicle Seized For Mineral Transport Violations Upon Payment Of Penalty, Says Rules Don't Mandate Indefinite Detention Short Time Gap Between 'Last Seen' And Death Clinches Murder Conviction Against Fired Driver: Allahabad High Court Court Must Restore Possession To Dispossessed Party If Ex-Parte Decree Is Set Aside Even If Property Descriptions Differ: Andhra Pradesh High Court Management Cannot Deny Compassionate Appointment Citing Delay If It Failed To Maintain Service Records: Calcutta High Court Long Possession Alone Does Not Establish Tenancy; Burden Of Proof Lies On Person Claiming Status Of Tenant: Bombay High Court Consent Of Minor Immaterial: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction But Acquits Man Of Kidnapping Charges Notional Income Of Minor In Motor Accident Claims Must Be Based On Minimum Wages Of Skilled Workmen: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹56.8 Lakhs Revenue Records Serve Only Fiscal Purpose, Cannot Be Treated As Proof Of Title To Property: Supreme Court Executing Court Cannot Grant 'Deemed Extension' Of Time For Deposit In Specific Performance Decree: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Becomes Inexecutable If Balance Sale Consideration Not Deposited Within Stipulated Time: Supreme Court Supreme Court Protects MSMEs From Closure Over Missing Environmental Clearance If Pollution Boards Were Unaware Of Requirement Industrial Units Operating With Valid PCB Consents Can't Be Closed Merely For Technical Want Of Prior Environmental Clearance: Supreme Court Punishment On Charge Not Framed In Show Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Reduces Doctor's Penalty To Censure Plea Of Acquiescence Cannot Defeat Lawful Title Claim When Encroachment Is Established: Madras High Court Board Of Revenue Can't Quash Unchallenged Orders While Exercising Revisional Jurisdiction: Orissa High Court Penetration To Any Extent Sufficient For Offence Under POCSO Act; Intact Hymen No Bar For Conviction: Meghalaya High Court Expeditious Conclusion Of Summary Force Court Trial Not Arbitrary If Procedure Followed; ITBPF Act Self-Contained: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Doesn't Bar Appeal Filed Prior To Withdrawal Of Earlier Defective Appeal Against Same Order: Madhya Pradesh High Court Appointment Of Receiver Is An 'Extreme Remedy', Cannot Be Ordered Lightly Especially After Decades Of Inaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Maintenance Must Be Realistic: Delhi High Court Overturns Family Court’s Denial of Pendente Lite Maintenance

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Delhi has modified a previous judgment by the Family Court regarding the maintenance of a minor child and the denial of pendente lite maintenance to the appellant wife, Nidhi Sudan. The High Court, in its judgment delivered on December 4, 2023, emphasized the necessity of a ‘realistic’ approach towards maintenance, stating, “The maintenance has to be realistic, avoiding either of two extremes i.e. neither oppressive or extravagant, nor meagre to drive the applicant wife to penury or mere support.”

In the case of MAT.APP.(F.C.) 231/2023, the appellant, Nidhi Sudan, challenged the Family Court’s order, which had directed the respondent husband, Manish Kumar Khanna, to pay Rs.20,000/- per month for the child’s maintenance but denied pendente lite maintenance to her. The High Court, led by Justices V. Kameswar Rao and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, overturned this decision, adding a maintenance allowance of Rs.15,000/- per month for the wife.

The High Court's judgment highlighted several crucial aspects of the case. It brought attention to the appellant’s earnings and expenses, where she, being an MBA, LLB, and professionally qualified in Gems and Gemology, earns Rs.40,000/month with additional rental income. The appellant had claimed monthly expenses of Rs.1,18,633 for herself and her child, which the court recognized in its decision.

Significantly, the respondent’s non-participation in the proceedings was noted, and an adverse inference was drawn against him. The court presumed that the respondent, a practicing advocate with over 20 years of experience, earned at least Rs.1 lac/month. Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta observed, “The obligation of the husband to provide maintenance is on a higher pedestal than the wife.”

The High Court also critiqued the delay in the disposition of the interim maintenance application, underscoring the legislative intent for providing swift support. “An endeavour should be made by the Courts for disposal of interim maintenance application filed by the applicant within 60 days of service of notice,” the judgment read.

Date of Decision: December 4, 2023

NIDHI SUDAN VS MANISH KUMAR KHANNA

Latest Legal News