Delhi High Court Upholds Interim Maintenance for Estranged Wife and Children

Court Affirms Husband's Obligation Despite Claims of Limited Income and Wife's Employability

In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Sanjeev Narula, has upheld the decision of a lower court to award interim maintenance to Rukshar Hussain's estranged wife and their two minor children. This decision was contested by the husband, who argued his limited financial capacity and the employability of his wife.

The case revolves around a petition filed by Rukshar Hussain under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The petitioner sought interim maintenance claiming that her husband, who alleged to be a low-earning helper, was earning significantly more through his business. The trial court, after a thorough verification process, awarded Rs. 12,000 per month as interim maintenance, emphasizing that the responsibility to maintain the wife and children is both a moral and legal obligation of the husband.

The husband challenged this order, arguing that his wife is qualified and capable of earning, thus not entitled to maintenance. However, the court reaffirmed that the interim maintenance is necessary for the basic sustenance of the wife and children during the pendency of proceedings. It was noted that the husband's failure to disclose his actual income and comply with the maintenance order justified the court's decision.

The Delhi High Court observed that the trial court adopted a reasonable approach, considering the husband's attempts to misrepresent his financial status. Justice Narula highlighted that the court must make a judicial estimation when direct proof of income is unavailable, focusing on the standard of living and surrounding circumstances.

The court also dismissed the husband's appeal, stating that filing an appeal does not defer the payment of maintenance. The judgment underscores that an able-bodied husband cannot evade his duty to maintain his family by claiming limited means or the wife's potential employability.

This ruling reaffirms the legal stance that interim maintenance is a provisional measure, ensuring the wife's and children's survival during ongoing litigation. It does not preclude a fresh evaluation at the final stage, thus emphasizing the court's commitment to protecting the rights of women and children under the domestic violence act.

Bottom Line:

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act - Interim maintenance to wife and minor children awarded - Husband's claim of limited income and wife's employability rejected - Maintenance is both a moral and legal obligation of the husband - Interim maintenance is provisional and does not determine final rights.

Statutory provision(s): Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Sections 12; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 397, 401.

Rukshar Hussain v. State, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2803464