The Supreme Court of India witnessed a sharp exchange in a matrimonial dispute, as a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta found a husband’s claim of earning Rs 9,000 monthly and inability to pay higher alimony “difficult to swallow”.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court saw a sharp, witty exchange in a matrimonial matter as it questioned a husband’s claim that he earned only Rs 9,000 a month and could not afford higher alimony.
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said the husband’s assertion that he earned Rs 9,000 per month was “difficult to swallow”.
Justice Nath asked,
“Who earns Rs 9,000 these days?”
ALSO READ: ‘No Alimony for Financially Independent Spouses’: Delhi High Court
When the husband’s counsel said his client earned Rs 325 a day, the Court said it would summon the company he worked for. Jokingly, it even suggested that the husband’s lawyer, Advocate George Pothan, could pitch in to pay the maintenance.
Justice Nath quipped,
“Let the lawyer also contribute something then,”
The top court was hearing the wife’s petition seeking an increase in the alimony awarded by the trial court. The trial court had ordered a lump-sum payment of Rs 6 lakh as full and final alimony, which the husband had paid.
Unhappy with that sum, the wife sought Rs 30 lakh before the High Court, which dismissed her claim and upheld the trial court’s decision. She then approached the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Boosts Alimony to Rs 75,000/month, Orders House Transfer to Divorced Wife
At the hearing, the wife’s counsel told the Court that she had made two settlement proposals.
He said,
“I had made two offers. One, I may be paid a sum of Rs 12,000 per month for the rest of my life with annual increase. Alternatively, I may be given a lump sum amount of Rs 30 lakh,”
Pothan argued that alimony should be assessed based on the husband’s financial capacity and liabilities, stating that the husband was supported by his siblings and was also bearing his children’s education expenses.
He submitted,
“He has no means to pay. To even pay alimony, his father had to sell joint property,”
Justice Mehta responded bluntly,
“Beg, borrow, steal, that is the principle. To maintain your wife.”
Pothan repeated that his client worked every day and earned Rs 325 a day.
Justice Nath remarked,
“Nobody gets Rs 325 per day, Mr. Pothan,”
The Court suggested it might directly summon the employer.
ALSO READ: LEGAL EXPLAINER | Is Alimony the New Dowry? Who Really Pays the Price of Marriage?
Justice Nath said,
“Let us call Hindustan Auto Agency,”
Justice Mehta added,
“We will also have an enquiry from the concerned authority.”
Pothan said the husband’s colleagues were willing to file affidavits confirming similar pay and the employer could be asked to file an affidavit as well.
At one point, Justice Mehta offered another, tongue-in-cheek solution.
“Alright, keep her (the wife) with you then. That’s the best way out. She’ll make food for you, for children, everything.”
Pothan replied that the wife had filed complaints against the husband’s parents and questioned whether reconciliation was feasible.
The Court then reserved its decision.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
