Observing that the estranged husband’s claim that he earns only Rs 6 lakh per annum and lives a “life of abject poverty and subsistence” was “farcical”, the Bombay High Court on Monday (November 10) increased the maintenance payable by the businessman to his estranged wife by seven times from Rs 50 lakh to Rs 3.5 lakh per month.
The HC said the man “understated his financial strength” and also misled the court by claiming “to be a person of poor means” and the woman made a “prima facie strong case that the maintenance awarded to her is minimal”.
The court ordered the man to deposit Rs. 42,000 as payment for 12 months starting from November 1 in the woman’s account within four weeks.
The bench of Justices Burgess P Kulapawala and Somasekhar Sundaresan also took into consideration “inflation, and that their daughter is at an age where significant resources were needed to obtain quality vocational education”.
The couple married in 1997 and lived in the matrimonial home for 16 years and lived separately since 2013. The man filed a divorce petition in 2015. The family court granted interim maintenance of Rs. 50,000 per month. In 2023, the Family Court accepted the divorce application and granted him a divorce on the grounds of cruelty and fixed permanent alimony in the same amount.
The wife applied to the Supreme Committee to request an increase in alimony, claiming that she was struggling to maintain a decent life for her daughter, while the man objected to the compensation.
“It is true that for a divorced wife to basically ensure that her daughter has an acceptable standard of education and life, she may need to do multiple jobs to earn just Rs 1,000 a month,” the humanitarian coordinator noted.
Story continues below this ad
The court noted that the husband’s family was running several real estate, construction and financial companies, where he presented himself as the “torchbearer” of these companies and his stake in the family bank was more than Rs. 100 Crores.
The HC said that by referring to taxable income of only Rs. 6 lakhs per annum, the man would “make the court believe that” his expenses and lifestyle are being financed by Rs. 50,000 per month, but “the import is on the face of it ridiculous.”
Justice Sundaresan, who wrote the 41-page judgment, added, “We must hasten to add that in our minds, there is nothing that can be judgmental or inappropriate about having a high profile birthday party with free flow of alcohol, or wearing expensive t-shirts of luxury brands to the party. What does not attract us in forming our judgement, is the act of simultaneously lying about being a man of no means, earning only Rs 6 lakh per annum…”
The court also expressed its dissatisfaction with his request that his divorced wife reduce his daughter’s expenses, such as yoga lessons and violin lessons, in addition to cooking and baking lessons.
Story continues below this ad
“The repeated description of these matters as extravagant, in our opinion, and that too by someone of his lifestyle, materially undermines his credibility and underscores the contemptible and vindictive approach to his daughter’s welfare, for no reason other than the fact that the appellant woman is caring for her.”
The court, while increasing the amount of maintenance, held prima facie that the woman and her daughter were “entitled to live a decent life” and Rs. 50,000 per month “was not a reasonable and logical amount for maintenance.”
(tags for translation)Man hides real income and assets
