Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court Mother Killing Minor Children Over Husband's Refusal To Take Her To Workplace Is Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Andhra Pradesh High Court Specific Performance Of Registered Agreement To Sell Is No Longer Discretionary Post-2018 Amendment: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Determine If Tenanted Property Belongs To Joint Family Even If Tenancy Order Stands In Individual Karta's Name: Bombay High Court Notice Under Section 107 BNSS Mandatory Before Attaching Property; Right To Property Is A Constitutional Right: Calcutta High Court Post-Cognizance Arrest 'Makes No Sense' If Investigation Completed Without Arrest: Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under BNSS Criminal Courts Cannot Be Used To Settle Civil Inheritance Disputes Over Appreciated Land Values: Gujarat High Court Quashes Fraud Case Accused Must Raise Probable Defence To Rebut Statutory Presumption Under Section 139 NI Act If Signatures Are Undisputed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Passing Departmental Exam Not A Pre-requisite For Grant Of ACP/MACP Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Convenience Of Family And Accused Paramount For Jail Shifting; Trial Court Can't Reject Application Merely For Non-Residency: J&K High Court Litigants Who Attempt To Pollute The Stream Of Justice With Tainted Hands Are Not Entitled To Any Relief: Karnataka High Court Trial Court Must Implement Modified Preliminary Decree In Full: Telangana High Court Directs Partition Of Property Omitted In Final Decree Proceedings If Grievance Is Real But Lies Before Different Forum, Plaint Should Be Returned Under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, Not Rejected: Rajasthan High Court Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due To Severity Of Economic Offence If Evidence Is Documentary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Non-Compliance With Mandatory Duty To Inform Grounds Of Arrest Under Section 47 BNSS Is Impermissible: Orissa High Court Grants Bail Land Acquisition Award Finality Under Section 12 Is A Bar To Writ Petitions Challenging 'Public Necessity': Madhya Pradesh High Court State As Eminent Domain Is Obligated To Pay Adequate Compensation, Not Minimum To Suit Its Convenience: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Grants Emergency Parole To Life Convict To Execute Sale Deed, Repay Bank Loan To Prevent Family's Eviction High Court Cannot Act As Court Of First Instance In Service Matters Amenable To CAT Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Election Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction To Declare Caste Certificate Forged, Authority Vests Solely With Scrutiny Committee: Allahabad High Court Order IX Rule 7 CPC Requires 'Good Cause' Not 'Sufficient Cause'; Trial Court Can't Apply Higher Threshold To Pre-Decree Proceedings: Telangana High Court Victim Cannot Maintain Appeal Seeking Enhancement Of Sentence Under Section 372 CrPC; Such Power Exclusively With State: Rajasthan 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