Quantum of Maintenance

How Rajnesh v Neha significantly impacted matrimonial law?

The landmark decision (Rajnesh v Neha AIR 2021 SUPREME COURT 569) made by Justices Indu Malhotra and Subhash Reddy has significantly impacted the legal scenario around a spouse claiming maintenance from the other. The decisions made by the Supreme Court are binding on all the courts of law in India. Hence the directions given in this judgment are implemented nationwide.

Background

Alimony pendente lite  or interim maintenance given during the pendency of the case, was intended to support the woman while the divorce case or maintenance case is subjudice. Permanent alimony is a one-time settlement, which is given at the end of the proceedings. The maintenance can be given over and above the alimony on a periodic basis. 

A spouse be it a man or woman can claim maintenance, however in majority of the cases, it is the woman who needs financial assistance post separation from her husband. The Constitution of India, the supreme law of the country mandates that the legislature make such statutes that empower women and children through Article 15 (3). To further this intent, there are certain laws or provisions made in the general laws specifically targeting upliftment of women as a measure of social justice. Also, the concept of maintenance or alimony to wives is an age-old provision made so as to prevent vagrancy, when men left their wives at will. 

Changing Circumstances

As women are also being educated and are also earning their livelihood, the circumstances around payment of maintenance and alimony are ever evolving. The application of matrimonial law is very subjective and the decisions made are for that man and that woman alone, however the principles behind such decisions are considered for future reference provided the facts around the dispute at hand are of similar nature. The judiciary through its landmark decisions has put a framework to be applied for deciding the quantum of maintenance reiterating at every instance that there is no straightjacket formula to calculate such a thing. 

Provisions under which maintenance can be claimed

BNSS Section 125 (CrPC 144) – Irrespective of the religion, even without seeking divorce from the husband, a wife can claim maintenance when the husband who has the capability to maintain his wife, is not doing so. When there is no provision for maintenance in personal law (e.g. Mohammedan Law), the wives can seek maintenance through this provision. 

Special Marriage Act, 1954 – Sections 36 & 37 

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Sections 24 & 25

Divorce Act, 1869 – Sections 36 & 37

The Parsi Marriage & Divorce Act, 1936 – Sections 39 & 40

Alimony pendente lite to the wife who has no independent income during the pendency of the proceedings for her support and towards the cost of legal proceedings. Permanent alimony and maintenance while passing the divorce decree or decree on application made seeking maintenance. The maintenance thus ordered can be modified, by either of the parties making such an application whenever there are changes in the circumstances. When the wife remarries or leads an adulterous life, the husband can approach the court to modify or rescind the order. 

Hindu Adoption & Maintenance Act, 1965 – Section 18

A Hindu wife ought to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime. Clause 2 of the same section details the reasons for a wife to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim on maintenance from him. The reasons are 

“(a) if he is guilty of desertion, that is to say, of abandoning her without reasonable cause and without her consent or against her wish, or of wilfully neglecting her; 

(b) if he has treated her with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in her mind that it will be harmful or injurious to live with her husband; 

(d) if he has any other wife living; 

(e) if he keeps a concubine in the same house in which his wife is living or habitually resides with a concubine elsewhere;

(f) if he has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion; 

(g) if there is any other cause justifying her living separately.”

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Section 20

The Magistrate has the power to order monetary relief to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of the domestic violence. This order can be under BNSS 125 (CrPC 144) or any other law which is applicable or can be in addition to the maintenance orders already passed under applicable provisions. 

The Core Challenges Addressed by the Landmark Judgement

Procedural delays – lengthy applications, missing key information causing adjournments and hence delayed proceedings 

Concealment of Financial Facts – spouses often hid the assets to avoid liability or to get more benefits

Multiple Statutes to claim maintenance – non disclosure of maintenance claims under different provisions where cases filed in different courts

Lack of uniformity – No standardised guidelines or directions resulting in arbitrary decisions.

Guidelines/ Directions on Maintenance as per Rajnesh v Neha

I Issue of Overlapping Jurisdiction:

If maintenance is awarded to the wife in a previously instituted proceeding, she is under a legal obligation to disclose the same in a subsequent proceeding for maintenance, which may be filed under another enactment. While deciding the quantum of maintenance in the subsequent proceeding, the civil court/family court shall take into account the maintenance awarded in any previously instituted proceeding, and determine the maintenance payable to the claimant. 

II Payment of Interim Maintenance:

• The Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets & Liabilities mandatorily be filed by the parties in all maintenance proceedings. 
• The applicant must file a concise application accompanied by the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets & Liabilities. 
• The respondent on receiving the notice, must reply within 4 weeks along with Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets & Liabilities. Maximum 2 adjournments allowed per application. Failure to comply if found wilful or contumacious, the defence of the respondent be struck off. If the respondent fails to file the affidavit, the court may decide the case solely based on the Applicant’s affidavit and pleadings.
• Courts may modify the affidavit format as needed for case-specific exigencies. 
• Courts may order additional disclosures beyond the affidavit if required. Parties must file amended/ supplementary affidavits for changes in financial status or new relevant information. 
• If declarations are disputed, parties may seek interrogatories or document production under Civil Procedure Code. 
• Perjury proceedings or contempt of court may be initiated for false/misleading affidavits. 
• EWS/ BPL individuals or casual laborers are exempt from filing the affidavit. 
• Courts must endeavor to decide interim maintenance applications within 4 to 6 months after affidavits are filed. 
• Professional marriage counselors must be available in every Family Court. 

Payment of Permanent Alimony

• Both parties may present oral/documentary evidence to show income, expenses, standard of living, liabilities in order to establish a fair alimony amount. 
• The length of the marriage has to be considered while deciding alimony, as it is not equitable to give life long alimony in short term marriages. 
• If the wife has custody, reasonable marriage expenses of children must be factored into alimony. The amounts should align with the husband’s financial capacity and family customs.
• Existing trusts/ investments made by the spouses or grandparents benefiting children must be considered.

III Criteria for Determining Quantum of Maintenance 

This judgement referred to the Delhi High Court in Bharat Hedge v. Smt. Saroj Hegde 140 (2007) DLT 16 where it laid down the following factors to be considered for determining maintenance: 

1. Status of the parties. 
2. Reasonable wants of the claimant. 
3. The independent income and property of the claimant. 
4. The number of persons, the non-applicant has to maintain. 
5. The amount should aid the Applicant to live in a similar lifestyle as he/she enjoyed in the matrimonial home.
6. Non-Applicant’s liabilities, if any.
7. Provisions for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance and treatment etc. of the applicant. 
8. Payment capacity of the non-applicant. 
9. Some guess work is not ruled out while estimating the income of the non-applicant when all the sources or correct sources are not disclosed. 
10. The non-applicant to defray the cost of litigation. 
11. The amount awarded Under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure is adjustable against the amount awarded Under Section 24 of the Act. 

Apart from the aforesaid factors enumerated hereinabove, certain additional factors were also added to the list for determining the quantum of maintenance payable. 

(a) Age and employment of parties

In a marriage of long duration, where parties have endured the relationship for several years, it would be a relevant factor to be taken into consideration. On termination of the relationship, if the wife is educated and professionally qualified, but had to give up her employment opportunities to look after the needs of the family being the primary caregiver to the minor children, and the elder members of the family, this factor would be required to be given due importance. This is of particular relevance in contemporary society, given the highly competitive industry standards, the separated wife would be required to undergo fresh training to acquire marketable skills and re-train herself to secure a job in the paid workforce to rehabilitate herself. With advancement of age, it would be difficult for a dependent wife to get an easy entry into the work-force after a break of several years. 

(b) Right to residence

When the parties lived in a shared household, the court may order directing the Respondent to secure the same level of alternate accommodation for the aggrieved woman as enjoyed by her in the shared household. This could be in terms of paying the rent and other costs involved thereto. 

(c) Where the wife is earning some income

The Courts have held that if the wife is earning, it cannot operate as a bar from being awarded maintenance by the husband. The quantum may vary depending on the sufficiency of her income to manage the household expenses, especially when children are in her care. 

(d) Maintenance of minor children 

The living expenses of the child would include expenses for food, clothing, residence, medical expenses, education of children. Extra coaching classes or any other vocational training courses to complement the basic education must be factored in, while awarding child support. Albeit, it should be a reasonable amount to be awarded for extra-curricular/coaching classes, and not an overly extravagant amount which may be claimed. Education expenses of the children must be normally borne by the father. If the wife is working and earning sufficiently, the expenses may be shared proportionately between the parties. 

(e) Serious disability or ill health

Serious disability or ill health of a spouse, child/children from the marriage/dependent relative who require constant care and recurrent expenditure, would also be a relevant consideration while quantifying maintenance.

IV Date from which Maintenance to be Awarded

In this order, the division bench has discussed various judgements recommending payment of maintenance from the date of application and also from the date of the order. Finally it says that the maintenance be paid from the date of application. However, courts have discretionary powers to decide depending on the facts of the case.

V Enforcement of Orders of Maintenance

The order or decree of maintenance may be enforced like a decree of a civil court, through the provisions which are available for enforcing a money decree, including civil detention, attachment of property, etc. as provided by various provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, more particularly Sections 51, 55, 58, 60 read with Order XXI. Striking off the defence of the Respondent is an order which ought to be passed in the last resort, if the Courts find default to be wilful and contumacious, particularly to a dependant unemployed wife, and minor children. Contempt proceedings for wilful disobedience may be initiated before the appropriate Court. 

Conclusion:

The key outcome of this judgement is that the implementation of the Affidavit Declaring Assets & Liabilities throughout India whenever an application seeking maintenance is made to the court of law. The declaration being in an affidavit, false information provided amounts to perjury. The information thus provided to the court is also shared with the opposite party as well. This would enable transparency and also an opportunity to the contesting parties to bring to the attention of the court if any incorrect information shared by the other.