Alimony is not synonymous with Looting

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

Alimony is one never dying joke in the households. How the wife looted the man? How the man rejected even paying a penny to his child and wife? The most exciting chapter in a divorce book would be ‘alimony.’ Ironically, where dowry stands in the marriage ceremony, today, ‘alimony’ stands in divorce proceedings.

It cannot be said that the concept of ‘alimony’ is itself nonsense. A woman must be given her share of maintenance by the husband since the traditional times. Yet, the society’s notions of family and woman are changing. Women are becoming independent pillars at home rather than the damsel in distress.

Hence, it is important for the notions of alimony to swerve around and halt according to the changing times. For instance, alimony has been increasingly denied by the Supreme Court where the income of the man is lower than that of a woman. Thus, depending on the circumstances, equity and justice, alimony has to be decided by the courts as per the facts.

Facts

In the instant case, a Varadaranjan had got married in Mayiladuthurai in 2001. He had a daughter born in 2003. Thereafter the wife claimed that he was neglecting the child and her. Hence, she filed for divorce.

Issue

Is the responsibilities of the Husband ought to be considered while ascertaining the Alimony?

Judgment

The court nodded a ‘Yes.’ Justice RMT Teekaraman, pointing out that a family court had directed a man earning Rs 10,500 a month to pay Rs 7,000 to his wife and child, said it would leave just Rs 3,500 for the man to maintain himself and his aged father.[1]

The court stated that

While awarding the maintenance in favour of the wife and children, the court should take into consideration his responsibility to look after the aged old parents, since the husband has been fastened with statutory objections to look after and maintain not only his wife but also his parents under the very same Section 125 of CrPC.”[2]

Also, after slamming the attitude of the trial court, the Madras judge said such an order need not be considered. The judge stated,

The trial court ought to have weighed the entire circumstances and placed a reasonable assessment financial burden on the shoulder of the husband.”[3]

Learning Outcome

Alimony share is depended on the expenditures that the Husband have to take in his family. It is not only depended on the wives’ income alone. An equitable value must be ascertained.

[1] hc/articleshow/59800121.cms

[2] hc/articleshow/59800121.cms

[3] hc/articleshow/59800121.cms

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -