The Supreme Court has observed that the maintenance of the spouse is top priority and cannot be reduced due to other financial commitments such as loan payments, investment in property or other financial obligations towards the creation of wealth.
The bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih were of the view that asset building simply means converting cash into equity. Therefore, you cannot claim that money is “gone” to avoid paying maintenance.
This observation arose from a maintenance case filed by the wife under Section 144 BNSS where she approached the apex court after being dissatisfied by the quantum of maintenance awarded by the family court as well as the High Court on the grounds that the husband has prior financial commitments.
The Court stated that if the spouse is living separately without a source of income it is the paramount duty of the husband to provide maintenance before taking up any other financial obligations.
The Court views these as “capital investments“ rather than “essential expenses,” asserting that the legal duty to support a spouse must come before the desire to build personal assets.
The Court also clarified the fact that maintenance award should not only be restricted to mathematical calculations but also the status and dignity of the spouse. It also noted that maintenance should not be “excessive” or punitive. The goal is support, not financial ruin for the payer.
Considering the facts of this case, the court increased the maintenance amount for the wife while striking a good balance between both the parties and also ordered to rectify the High Court order.
This ruling sets a high bar for how Family Courts and High Courts should interpret financial disclosures while keeping in mind the status and financial capacity of the parties.
The post Supreme Court rules maintenance takes priority over loans appeared first on India Legal.