The Court allowed enhanced maintenance payable to the wife to ₹14,000 from the ₹10,000 that had earlier been fixed in 2012 when the husband’s salary was lower.
The Delhi High Court has held that an increase in a husband’s earnings along with the rising cost of living constitutes sufficient grounds for enhancing the maintenance payable to his estranged wife.
The ruling came in response to a petition filed by a senior citizen woman who had challenged a family court’s decision rejecting her request for higher maintenance.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that both the escalation of living expenses and the husband’s improved income warranted an upward revision of the maintenance amount.
“The rise in his income coupled with the significant increase in the cost of living constitutes a clear change in circumstances warranting enhancement of the amount of maintenance,” the Court said.
Although recognizing that the husband is a retired senior citizen, the Court emphasized that the wife’s right to live with dignity cannot be compromised, and held that a modest enhancement in maintenance would strike a fair balance.
“This Court is however not unmindful of the fact that the respondent-husband is a senior citizen, surviving on his limited post-retirement resources. At the same time, the petitioner, being the legally wedded wife, is also entitled to a fair amount which would enable her to maintain herself with dignity. Thus, while considering the respondent’s advanced age and financial position, a modest enhancement in maintenance would strike a just balance between the competing equities of both parties,” the Court stated.
The couple married in 1990, but since 1992 the wife has been living apart, alleging that she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home owing to physical and mental harassment stemming from dowry demands by her husband and his family.
Although the couple’s divorce petition was dismissed in 2011, leaving their marital status intact, the family court in 2012 ordered the husband to pay the wife ₹10,000 per month as maintenance.
Subsequently, in 2018, the wife applied for an increase to ₹30,000, citing escalating medical expenses and pointing out that her husband’s earnings had risen due to a promotion and the benefits of the 7th Pay Commission.
Although the husband officially retired in 2017, he remained in service for an additional two years on extension. The wife further submitted that she had previously depended largely on her father for financial support, but following his death in 2017, she faced increased hardship, especially in meeting medical expenses.
In 2024, the family court dismissed her request for enhanced maintenance, prompting her to approach the High Court.
The High Court noted that the family court had overlooked the rise in the husband’s salary while rejecting her application.
“What has been completely overlooked is that in 2012, the net income of the respondent was taken to be only ₹28,705/- and on the basis of this net income, maintenance of ₹10,000/- was fixed in favour of the petitioner. In contrast, the admitted pension of the respondent today is ₹40,068/- per month, which is a clear increase, and no deductions were to be made from this amount,” the Court observed.
The Court further objected to the exclusion of the wife’s name from the husband’s Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) card.
“It is, however, deeply concerning that despite the petitioner continuing to be legally wedded to the respondent, and having been held entitled to maintenance by the Courts, the respondent had her name deleted from his CGHS card,” the Court observed.
The Court held that the wife’s inclusion under the husband’s CGHS benefits is a significant right flowing from the marital relationship. It directed the husband to restore her name to the scheme, thereby ensuring her access to medical care in government hospitals.
“The entitlement to a CGHS/DGHS card is a valuable right flowing from the marital relationship and cannot be denied merely because the wife seeks treatment in a government hospital. The card provides access to several other facilities, including specialized consultations and emergency medical assistance, which become indispensable in old age. It is therefore expected that the respondent will ensure that the petitioner’s name is restored on his CGHS card,” the Court stated.
The Court accordingly upheld the wife’s petition and directed that her maintenance be raised from ₹10,000 to ₹14,000 per month.
“This Court holds that the petitioner is entitled to receive maintenance at the enhanced rate of ₹14,000/- per month from the respondent, payable with effect from the date of filing of the present revision petition,” the Court directed.
