Slug: Setback for earning wife
CH NEWS
BENGALURU
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that a financially independent wife earning more than her husband is not entitled to maintenance merely because she is a woman. Setting aside a trial court’s order, the High Court quashed the direction requiring a husband to pay his wife interim maintenance of Rs. 20,000 per month.
Justice Dr. Chillakur Sumalatha passed the order while allowing a petition filed by the husband challenging the trial court’s maintenance award.
The court observed that maintenance cannot be granted based on gender-based assumptions that a husband must invariably support his wife. Instead, courts must examine the financial circumstances of both parties before awarding interim or permanent maintenance.
It held that where a wife is financially stable, earns more than her husband and has no additional responsibilities such as caring for children, there is no justification for directing the husband to pay maintenance.
The judgment stressed that family courts should not be influenced by the traditional notion that wives must always be maintained by their husbands. Maintenance, the court said, should be awarded only when it is established that the wife lacks sufficient financial resources to support herself.
Referring to the facts of the case, the bench noted that the wife had admitted to earning about Rs. 1 lakh per month, while the husband drew a monthly salary of Rs. 60,646. Given her higher income, the court said she was capable of maintaining herself and that directing the husband to pay Rs. 20,000 every month was legally unsustainable.
“The court should not proceed to award maintenance solely on the assumption that men are bound to maintain women,” the judgment observed, adding that the financial capacity and needs of both spouses must remain the determining factors.
The dispute arose after the couple, who married in 2024, began living separately within a few months due to matrimonial differences. The wife subsequently approached the trial court seeking maintenance, which resulted in an order directing the husband to pay Rs. 20,000 per month.
Challenging the order, the husband contended that his wife’s income exceeded his own and that she was financially self-sufficient. Accepting his argument, the High Court set aside the interim maintenance order.
However, the court clarified that its ruling pertains only to interim maintenance and will not influence the final adjudication of the matrimonial dispute, which will be decided independently by the trial court based on the evidence presented by both parties.
