By, THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE A.M. SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN
In this case, the husband had sought maintenance pendente lite from the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
FACTS
The marriage between the respondent and petitioner was solemnized on 31.01.2011, and after that the marriage between them went sour.
Earlier, the wife claimed that the husband has raped her with the promise to get married to her, but that accusation was proved wrong and it was revealed that they had already gotten married in a nearby temple and also solemnized their wedding in a hotel.
In her divorce petition, the wife claimed cruelty.
The husband moved to the court and claimed that his students, which were mostly girls has stopped learning music from him, after he was falsely accused of rape and cruelty by his wife, and thus have no source of income. And his wife is a lecturer in a reputed institute in Mangalore and earns pretty well.
So, he claimed maintenance from her, as she was responsible for his unemployment.
JUDGEMENT
While determining the facts of the case, the Court made the following key observations pertaining to maintenance claim by husband,
That under Section 24 a petition can be filed by either wife or husband who is without any employment and no source of income to support pendente lite maintenance and litigation expenses from the other spouse, who is capable of providing the same.
In the case of wife filing an application for maintenance from the husband, unless he is able to establish that he is permanently disabled from getting any income, he cannot be exonerated from the payment of maintenance to his wife.
That a husband seeking maintenance from the wife can be treated only as an exceptional case, as normally he has got the liability or obligation to maintain the wife and vice versa is only exceptional.
That a husband not making any attempt to earn money, though capable of getting private jobs cannot claim maintenance from the wife who was in Government service.
The court also mentioned that if the court started to grant maintenance to the husband, then idleness of husbands will be promoted and they will be tempted not to do any work and depend on their wives for their livelihood, and such thing is not expected to be promoted in the society and that was not the intention of Section 24 of the Act providing maintenance to either party to the proceedings.
That the legislative intent under Section 24 was intended to support only such spouse who is really incapable of maintaining himself/herself to get something for their livelihood and to conduct the litigation which they were forced to face from the other party.
In the above case, the family court ordered wife to pay Rs. 6000 per month to her husband, as her false allegations destroyed her husband’s career.
MY OPINION
The concept of alimony is to support the one, who is economically weak. Even a few years back, the woman used to be dependent on men economically, therefore, alimony was important for them, so that they do not live under a cruel condition due to financial disability. But now as the society is evolving and women are working and earning handsomely, it is only fair that if, in a relationship, one spouse is not able to maintain himself/herself, then the other one help him/her out. If we are want to attain gender equality, we must gender neutralize our laws too, where necessary.
Alimony (maintenance) is a legal obligation on a person to provide financial support to their spouse during or after marital separation or divorce under divorce maintenance rules in India. Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Section 24), both the husband and wife can legally claim permanent alimony and maintenance under divorce alimony rules.
