Increased salary, rise in cost of living valid grounds to increase maintenance, rules Delhi HC

New Delhi

A bench of justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered the ruling on Monday while dealing with a 60-year-old woman’s plea challenging the family court’s order refusing to enhance her maintenance. (HT Archive)

The Delhi High Court has held that a husband’s increased income and the rising cost of living are valid grounds for enhancing the maintenance amount payable to his separated wife.

A bench of justice Swarana Kanta Sharma delivered the ruling on Monday while dealing with a 60-year-old woman’s plea challenging the family court’s order refusing to enhance her maintenance.

The couple married in April 1990 but separated two years later, after the woman alleged physical and mental harassment and dowry demands. In 2012, the family court ordered the husband to pay ₹10,000 in monthly maintenance. In 2018, the woman sought an increase, citing her husband’s promotion from TGT to PGT, leading to a higher salary. Although the husband officially retired in 2017, he continued to remain employed on extension for another two years. She also informed the court that her father, who supported her financially, had passed away, and she was incurring significant medical expenses due to arthritis and thyroid issues. However, her application for enhancement was dismissed by the family court in September last year, citing her bank account balance and existing fixed deposits as indicators of financial stability.

Challenging the ruling in the high court, the woman alleged that the family court’s order was illegal since the court failed to consider that the maintenance awarded in 2012 was fixed on the basis of her husband’s income of ₹28,000 whereas, at the time of passing this order, it had increased to ₹40,000. It went on to add that the maintenance amount was last fixed in 2012, and 12 years later, her husband’s income and her expenses had significantly increased. She also alleged that although her husband was a government employee, he had removed her name from the CGHS card, preventing her from accessing free medical treatment.

Opposing the petition, the 70-year-old husband argued that his financial capacity had significantly reduced following his retirement in July 2017. He said he had been consistently paying maintenance for the past 32 years, yet his wife had neither agreed to resume cohabitation nor taken steps to dissolve the marriage.

Ultimately, justice Sharma set aside the family court’s order, saying that the court failed to appreciate that the income against which the maintenance was assessed in 2012 was lower than the man’s current pensionary income. “The rise in his income coupled with the significant increase in the cost of living constitutes a clear change in circumstances warranting enhancement of the amount of maintenance,” justice Sharma said.

She added, “Both the petitioner and the respondent are now senior citizens, being above 60 years of age. Though they have been living separately for nearly three decades, and despite the respondent‟s petition for dissolution of marriage having been dismissed, they continue to remain legally married – if not in companionship, then at least in the eyes of law and on judicial record. The petitioner, throughout, has remained financially dependent upon the respondent.”

The judge, in her ruling, also directed the husband to restore his wife’s name on the CGHS card.

“The entitlement to a CGHS/DGHS card is a valuable right flowing from the marital relationship and cannot be denied merely because the wife seeks treatment in a government hospital. The card provides access to several other facilities, including specialized consultations and emergency medical assistance, which become indispensable in old age,” justice Sharma said.

However, taking note of the man’s advanced age and limited financial resources post retirement, the judge enhanced the maintenance from ₹10,000 to ₹14,000 and directed him to clear the arrears of maintenance within six weeks from the date of the order.

_{Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.}