The Supreme Court outlines eight crucial factors to determine a wife’s alimony in divorce cases. These guidelines aim to ensure fair, balanced, and need-based financial support post-separation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a landmark ruling (2024 INSC 961), the Supreme Court of India established a structured yet flexible framework for determining permanent alimony. The Court clarified that these are not rigid rules but guiding principles, and every case must be assessed on its unique facts and circumstances.
ALSO READ: LEGAL EXPLAINER | Is Alimony the New Dowry? Who Really Pays the Price of Marriage?
What Did The Supreme Court Say?
The apex court reiterated principles earlier laid down in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha and Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel. It stated that the primary objective of permanent alimony is to ensure the financial well-being of the dependent spouse after divorce.
Difference Between Maintenance and Permanent Alimony:
Maintenance: This refers to periodic financial assistance given by one spouse to the other, often during legal proceedings or post-divorce, depending on the dependent spouse’s needs.
Permanent Alimony: This is a one-time lump sum payment made after divorce is granted. It aims to offer long-term security to the financially dependent spouse, ensuring they are not left without support after marital dissolution.
ALSO READ: Kerala High Court Rules: Wedding Gold is Woman’s Property, Must Be Returned After Divorce
In its landmark judgment, Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel (2024 INSC 961), the Supreme Court laid down several key factors to guide courts in determining permanent alimony. These include:
The social and financial status of the parties, the reasonable needs of the wife and any dependent children, the qualifications and employment status of both spouses, and whether the applicant has any independent income or assets.
The Court also emphasized the importance of considering the standard of living enjoyed by the wife in the matrimonial home, any employment sacrifices made for family responsibilities, and reasonable litigation costs in the case of a non-working wife.
Additionally, the husband’s financial capacity, including his income, existing maintenance obligations, and liabilities, must be assessed. However, the Supreme Court clarified that these factors serve as broad guidelines and not a “straitjacket rubric,” leaving room for courts to consider other relevant circumstances based on the facts of each case.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Grants Divorce After 17 Years of Separation, Orders Rs 40 Lakh Alimony
Additional Factors Considered by Courts & Lawyers in Practice
Duration of Marriage & Separation:
- Longer marriages usually result in higher alimony, especially if the wife was financially dependent.
- In Manish Jain v. Akanksha Jain (2017), the Supreme Court held that short marriages don’t warrant heavy alimony.
- Long-term estrangement, even without legal divorce, also weighs in heavily.
Conduct of the Parties:
- Cruelty, infidelity, desertion, and attempts to conceal assets or delay litigation influence the outcome.
- In U. Sree v. U. Srinivas (2013), the Supreme Court emphasized that Mental cruelty was accepted as a valid factor in deciding maintenance.
Wife’s Efforts to Re-Skill or Find Employment:
- Courts appreciate genuine efforts to become self-reliant, even if such attempts don’t result in immediate employment.
- In Shailja v. Khobbanna (2017), the Supreme Court emphasized that the Capacity to earn is not equal to actual earnings.
Childcare Responsibilities:
- Custodial or caregiving roles, especially for special-needs children, lead to enhanced alimony.
Dowry or Prior Settlements:
- Previous benefits under Section 498A or Section 125 CrPC may lead to adjustments in alimony.
- In Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury (2017), it was held that alimony was reduced due to earlier maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
Delay in Seeking Alimony:
- Courts question unexplained delays in claiming alimony.
- Delay of over 8 years without justification led to reduced alimony in one reported case.
Lifestyle Choices Post-Separation:
- A spouse who shows financial independence post-separation (property purchase, travel, mutual fund investments) may receive lower support.
Mutual Consent and Waiver Arrangements:
- Many couples opt for reduced alimony in exchange for custody rights or quicker settlements. Courts often uphold these under Article 142.
Important Judicial Trends
Age and Health of the Spouses:
- Courts weigh in on chronic illness, age-related challenges, and physical disability.
- This issue was highlighted in the case of Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar (2011).
Future Earning Potential:
- Even if one is jobless at the moment, strong qualifications or realistic job prospects may reduce the alimony amount.
RTI Disclosures on Income:
- In a Jharkhand High Court case, an RTI revealed that the husband earned far more than declared, which resulted in enhanced monthly alimony to Rs 90,000, especially due to the care needs of an autistic child.
Re-marriage and New Obligations:
- The Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt.Kiran Gupta and Another v. Shree Ramji Gupta noted that remarriage and financial responsibilities towards new families (e.g., second wife, new children) can be relevant.
Maintenance: Striking a Balance – Not Punishment
Shashank Agarwal, Founder of Legum Solis, emphasizes that courts must approach alimony and maintenance matters by carefully evaluating the unique facts and circumstances of each case. While judicial precedents have provided indicative frameworks, the courts have intentionally avoided adopting a rigid or formulaic approach.
The primary objective behind awarding maintenance, he notes, is to safeguard the well-being and dignity of the dependent spouse and children following separation or divorce; it is not meant to serve as a punitive measure.
Agarwal further points out that a husband’s financial obligations are not limited solely to his immediate family; in contemporary contexts, especially in start-ups or entrepreneurial ventures, courts must also consider his commitments toward his business, employees, and other financial responsibilities. Echoing the Supreme Court’s guidance, he asserts that the ultimate aim is to strike a fair balance, ensuring that maintenance is neither excessive nor inadequate, thereby enabling the dependent spouse to live with reasonable comfort post-separation.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Divorce
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
