Explicit Averments Are Sufficient to Establish Knowledge: Supreme Court Restores Complaint Under Section 138 NI Act MACT | Just Compensation Must Factor in Loss of Dependency, Future Prospects, and Emotional Plight of Survivors: Supreme Court Compensation Must Reflect Justice, Not Delays—Court Shifts Market Valuation to 2019: Supreme Court Orders Compensation Recalculated for Land Acquired in 2003 Child’s Welfare Takes Precedence Over Parental Disputes: Supreme Court Modifies Interim Visitation Arrangement Settlement Cannot Justify Quashing Criminal Proceedings in Economic Offenses: Supreme Court Supreme Court Restores Higher Compensation for Land Acquired in Mewat: High Court Erred in Undervaluation Non-Alienability of Assigned Lands is a Non-Negotiable Legal Principle: Supreme Court of India Fraudulent Claims Cannot Prevail: Courts Must Deny Relief to Litigants with Unclean Hands: Supreme Court Non-Alienability of Assigned Lands is Fundamental to Public Policy: Supreme Court on the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Lands Act, 1977 MCD Authorized to Initiate Tariff Adoption Under Section 63 Electricity Act: Supreme Court Reinstates Delhi Waste-to-Energy Project Unexplained Delays and Contradictions in Evidence Lead to Acquittal: Telangana High Court No Mens Rea or Loss to State Exchequer: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes FIR in Cartage Policy Case Bar Councils cannot impose additional charges contrary to Supreme Court directives: Kerala HC Investigation is not theatrics; it must serve justice with coherence and truth: J&K HC Quashes FIRs in a Case of Alleged Legal System Exploitation Acquittal in Criminal Case Does Not Affect Disciplinary Proceedings or Forfeiture of Gratuity: Gujarat High Court Delhi High Court Restores Wife’s Right to Cross-Examination, Calls for Sensitivity in Matrimonial Cases Order 6 Rule 17 | Subsequent Events Can Justify Amendment of Pleadings Even After Trial: Calcutta High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Triable Issues Arising From Contradictory Sale Deeds Demand Full Adjudication Through Trial: Bombay High Court Mere Allegations Won't Suffice: AP High Court Orders Government to Pay Contractor, Reduces Interest on Recovery Suspicion Cannot Substitute Proof: Allahabad High Court Acquits Appellant in Circumstantial Evidence-Based Murder Case No Evidence, No Resumption: Andhra High Court Confirms Injunction Protecting Plaintiffs’ Possession of Lands Desertion and irretrievable breakdown of marriage, sustained for over two decades, constitute mental cruelty: Allahabad High Court Dissolves 34-Year-Old Marriage Acquittal in Criminal Case Must Prompt Review of Dismissal: Telangana High Court There Must Be an Intention to Provoke or Drive the Victim to Commit Suicide: High Court Discharges Accused in Abetment of Suicide Case Plaintiffs' Claim of Private Ownership Over Public Road Fails: Balance of Convenience Favors Defendants, Rules Bombay High Court No Prima Facie Case Against Petitioners: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR on Unauthorized Construction Investigation Delayed; Fundamental Right to Travel Cannot Be Curtailed Without Justification: Delhi High Court Upholds Suspension of LOC Minority Members Cannot Stall Redevelopment: Gujarat High Court Upholds Majority Consent in Nidhi Apartment Case” Sufficient Proof of Security Ownership is Essential: Kerala High Court in Partition Suit Madras High Court Quashes Hate Speech Case Against Political Leader Over YouTube Remarks 'Employers Cannot Unilaterally Alter Employment Terms: Punjab And Haryana High Court Suspicious Circumstances Invalidated Unregistered Will in Partition Dispute: Supreme Court Consent from State Not Required for Investigation of Offenses Under Central Acts Against Central Government Employees: Supreme Court Vague Allegations Cannot Justify Criminal Proceedings: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Foreign National Strict Proof Not Required in Accident Claims; Preponderance of Probability Is Sufficient: Supreme Court Leaseholders of Shamlat Deh Lands Are Not Entitled to Ownership; Eviction Orders Upheld: Supreme Court Environmental and Energy Laws Must Be Harmonized to Tackle Waste Challenges: Supreme Court Vague Allegations Unsupported by Evidence Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Under Sections 354 and 506 IPC Acquittal in Primary Offence Nullifies Proclaimed Offender Status and Section 174A IPC Proceedings: Supreme Court Merits of the Case Should Not Be Prejudged at Bail Stage: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Bail Order in MCOCA Case Quashing | Cognizance Without Compliance to Section 195 CrPC Vitiates Entire Proceedings: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings

Maintenance to be Recalculated at 25% of Husband’s Income for Wife, 20% for Each Child: Allahabad High Court Modifies Family Court’s Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant decision, the Allahabad High Court today revised the interim maintenance amounts previously ordered by the Family Court in Muzaffarnagar. The court declared that the maintenance “be recalculated at 25% of the husband’s income for the wife and 20% for each child,” ensuring the amounts reflect the respondent’s true financial capability.

The decision comes after Smt. Shaily Mittal and her two children filed a criminal revision petition against the interim maintenance awarded by the Family Court under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The petitioners sought an enhancement citing that the initial maintenance calculation did not fully account for the husband’s undisclosed earnings from his business and investments.

Initially, the Family Court awarded Rs. 7,000 to the wife and Rs. 2,000 to each child. The revisionists challenged these figures, providing evidence of the husband’s additional income sources including substantial investments in NSCs, PPF, and FDRs, which were previously overlooked.

Justice Surendra Singh-I reviewed the submissions and evidence, focusing on:

Undisclosed Income: The husband’s monthly income was reassessed at Rs. 60,000 based on business involvement and investments.

Maintenance Recalculation: Aligning with legal precedents, the court set new maintenance amounts to 25% of the husband’s income for the wife and 20% for each child, amounting to Rs. 15,000 and Rs. 6,000 respectively.

Legal Framework: Citing cases such as Shailja vs. Khobbanna and Kalyan Dey Chowdhury vs. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy, the judgment emphasized the court’s duty to ensure maintenance reflects the payer’s financial reality.

The Allahabad High Court amended the previous order to provide fairer maintenance support based on the comprehensive assessment of the husband’s finances. The revised maintenance is backdated to the original application date, with arrears to be settled in four installments.

 Date of Decision: 10th April 2024

 Smt. Shaily Mittal And 2 Others  VS Opposite Party: State Of U.P And Another

Similar News