Supreme Court Examines the Scope and Object of Maintenance to Spouse while Enhancing the Maintenance Amount to Wife
In a recent judgment it has been held that "the object of maintenance proceedings is well settled. The provision is intended to prevent destitution and that a wife is not required to establish absolute inability to survive before claiming maintenance." Maintenance must not be illusory and should enable the wife to live with dignity. Further, in Rajnesh v. Neha and Another [2020] GCtR 1011 (SC), Court reiterated that maintenance must be fair, reasonable and commensurate with the status of the parties and the financial capacity of the husband.
Deductions in Maintenance
The determination of maintenance must be guided by a balanced assessment of the earning capacity of the husband and the reasonable needs of the wife. In the facts of this case it was not in dispute that the respondent is in salaried employment and has a regular source of income. The Family Court, while determining maintenance, appears to have accorded considerable weight to deductions reflected in the salary, and the High Court has, to an extent, corrected the inadequacy by enhancing the amount.
Financial Commitments of Husband and Impact
It was held that "deductions arising out of financial commitments such as loan repayments, particularly where they contribute towards creation of assets, cannot be placed on the same footing as necessary expenditure so as to substantially reduce the liability of maintenance. The liability to maintain a spouse is a primary obligation and cannot be subordinated to such financial arrangements."
Dignity of Wife
Enhancing the amount it was held that the obligation of the husband to maintain his spouse is a primary and continuing duty, which must be discharged in a manner that enables the wife to live with dignity and in a standard commensurate with that enjoyed during the subsistence of the marriage.
Case Reference : Deepa Joshi v. Gaurav Joshi [2026] GCtR 327 (SC)