No maintenance if wife contributes to man’s inability to earn: HC
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has stated that if a wife’s actions or omissions contribute to her husband’s inability to earn, she cannot claim maintenance from him. This judgment was passed while hearing a plea by a woman who was seeking maintenance from her doctor husband. The court rejected the petition, citing that the husband’s inability to earn was a direct result of the wife’s actions, and therefore, she was not entitled to claim maintenance from him.
The case in question involved a doctor who was allegedly shot at by his brother-in-law and father-in-law during an altercation. As a result of the shooting, the doctor was left unable to earn a living or provide maintenance to his wife. The wife, however, claimed that she was entitled to maintenance from her husband, despite his inability to earn. The High Court, however, rejected her petition, stating that the wife’s actions had contributed to her husband’s inability to earn, and therefore, she was not entitled to claim maintenance from him.
This ruling has significant implications for the concept of maintenance in Indian law. Maintenance is a critical aspect of family law, and it is intended to provide financial support to a spouse or child who is unable to support themselves. However, the court’s ruling suggests that the concept of maintenance is not absolute and that the courts will consider the circumstances surrounding a spouse’s inability to earn when determining whether maintenance is payable.
In this case, the court found that the wife’s actions had contributed to her husband’s inability to earn. The husband had been shot at by his brother-in-law and father-in-law, allegedly at the behest of the wife. The court held that the wife’s actions had led to the altercation, which in turn had resulted in the husband’s inability to earn. Therefore, the court ruled that the wife was not entitled to claim maintenance from her husband.
This ruling highlights the importance of considering the circumstances surrounding a spouse’s inability to earn when determining whether maintenance is payable. It also suggests that the courts will not automatically grant maintenance to a spouse simply because they are unable to earn. Rather, the courts will consider the underlying circumstances and determine whether the spouse’s inability to earn is a result of their own actions or omissions.
The concept of maintenance is governed by Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which provides that a magistrate may order a person to pay maintenance to their spouse or child if they are unable to support themselves. However, the court’s ruling suggests that this provision is not absolute and that the courts will consider the circumstances surrounding a spouse’s inability to earn when determining whether maintenance is payable.
In recent years, there have been several cases where the courts have considered the concept of maintenance in the context of a spouse’s inability to earn. In one notable case, the Supreme Court held that a husband’s inability to earn was not a sufficient ground for granting maintenance to his wife, if the husband’s inability to earn was a result of his own actions or omissions. This ruling was seen as a significant departure from the traditional approach to maintenance, which had previously emphasized the husband’s obligation to provide for his wife and children.
The Allahabad High Court’s ruling in this case is consistent with this approach, and it highlights the importance of considering the circumstances surrounding a spouse’s inability to earn when determining whether maintenance is payable. The ruling also suggests that the courts will not hesitate to reject a claim for maintenance if they find that the spouse’s actions or omissions have contributed to their inability to earn.
In conclusion, the Allahabad High Court’s ruling in this case is a significant development in the concept of maintenance in Indian law. The ruling highlights the importance of considering the circumstances surrounding a spouse’s inability to earn when determining whether maintenance is payable. It also suggests that the courts will not automatically grant maintenance to a spouse simply because they are unable to earn. Rather, the courts will consider the underlying circumstances and determine whether the spouse’s inability to earn is a result of their own actions or omissions. This approach is likely to have significant implications for the concept of maintenance in Indian law, and it is likely to be the subject of further debate and discussion in the coming years.
News Source: https://repository.inshorts.com/articles/en/PTI/dbbe1fad-7e39-43f2-8728-ba0777cf95e5
About the Author
