YV v. VV, 2025
The Court emphasized that the discretion under Section 24 must be exercised judiciously, considering the financial standing, independent income, and overall circumstances of both parties.
Judgement Details
Court
Delhi High Court
Date of Decision
6 August 2025
Judges
Justice Anil Kshetarpal ⦁ Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Section 13(1)(ia), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Facts of the Case
- A woman sought interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act from her estranged husband during ongoing matrimonial proceedings.
-
The husband, aged over 70 years, had been living separately from the wife for approximately 30 years.
-
The Family Court denied the maintenance, prompting the woman to appeal to the Delhi High Court.
-
The husband contended that the wife is a highly qualified retired Senior Teacher and resides with her two employed adult sons who are capable of supporting her financially.
-
The husband argued he was financially incapacitated, unfit for employment, and had lost all retiral benefits, requiring him to borrow money for basic living expenses.
Issues
-
Whether the estranged wife is entitled to interim maintenance under Section 24 given the husband’s financial incapacity?
-
The scope and application of Section 24 in balancing the financial conditions of both spouses during matrimonial litigation?
-
Whether the husband’s advanced age and lack of income negate the wife’s claim for maintenance pendente lite?
Held
-
The husband’s inability to pay due to advanced age, health issues, and financial loss outweigh the wife’s claim for interim maintenance.
-
The wife’s access to financial support through her retired status and employed adult sons further diminished her entitlement under Section 24.
-
The appeal was dismissed, reinforcing that Section 24 is intended for genuine cases of financial hardship, not as a right to maintenance based on spousal demands.
Analysis
-
The judgment highlights the importance of balancing financial realities and procedural fairness in matrimonial maintenance claims.
-
It clarifies that the protective provision of Section 24 should not be misused to impose undue financial burdens on a spouse who is genuinely financially incapacitated.
-
The ruling underscores the need for courts to assess the financial status of both spouses, including independent income and support systems, before granting interim maintenance.
-
This decision serves as precedent in understanding the discretionary nature of maintenance pendente lite under the Hindu Marriage Act.