The Allahabad High Court upheld a maintenance order directing a husband to pay his wife, ruling that a PM Awas Yojana house cannot replace maintenance rights. The Court said an able-bodied husband cannot avoid responsibility by claiming unemployment or low income under law.
The Allahabad High Court ruled that a wife cannot be denied maintenance under Section 125 CrPC merely because her parents are supporting her. The Court held that parental assistance does not absolve a husband of his statutory obligation to maintain his wife.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that maintenance cannot be granted to wives automatically without examining financial circumstances. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha said courts must consider income, independence and responsibilities of both spouses before passing orders, setting aside a direction requiring a husband to pay Rs 20,000 monthly.
The Bombay High Court ruled that a divorced woman can continue recovering maintenance granted through a decree from her deceased former husband’s estate. However, she cannot seek enhancement of maintenance after his death, as personal obligations end upon the obligor’s demise.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that a father cannot avoid his legal responsibility to maintain his children merely by claiming unemployment. The Court directed a man to pay monthly maintenance to his son and daughter, reaffirming parental obligations under law.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that a father’s obligation toward his daughters includes funding higher education and not merely providing basic maintenance. Stressing that women empowerment must be implemented in practice, the Court directed payment of Rs 46.26 lakh towards the daughters’ medical and engineering education expenses.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that a woman married during childhood cannot be denied reasonable maintenance, observing that she was victimised first by child marriage and later by being awarded a meagre maintenance amount. The Court emphasised the need to protect the rights and dignity of women.
The Allahabad High Court held that a mother’s alleged remarriage cannot defeat the independent statutory right of minor children to claim maintenance from their biological father, reaffirming that a father’s obligation to maintain his children continues regardless of matrimonial disputes or changes in the mother’s marital status.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that maintenance in matrimonial disputes should generally apply from the filing date of the application, but courts cannot retrospectively impose a uniform amount without assessing the husband’s actual income and earnings during different litigation stages.
The Orissa High Court dismissed a husband’s plea challenging a maintenance order, observing that an educated and able-bodied man cannot avoid supporting his wife and minor children by citing financial hardship, as he is presumed capable of earning and fulfilling his legal responsibility.
