Bombay HC orders woman to pay alimony to her former husband

The Bombay High Court has ordered a woman to pay alimony to her “indigent” former husband.

The woman, who is a school teacher, had approached the High Court challenging a local court order, but the High Court upheld the order passed by the Nanded court and directed the woman to pay alimony to her ex-husband.

The woman had contended that since she had divorced him in 2015, the lower court orders, passed in 2017 and 2019, should be quashed.

Upholding the order in its February 26 verdict, Justice Bharati Dangre of the Aurangabad bench of the High Court ruled that the woman should pay interim monthly maintenance of ₹3,000 to her ex-husband, as per the direction of the civil court.

The civil court had also directed the headmaster of her school to deduct ₹5,000 from her salary every month and deposit the same with the court towards unpaid maintenance since August 2017.

Justice Dangre said that Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act confer a right on the indigent spouse to claim maintenance and upheld the lower court’s order.

“The provision of maintenance / permanent alimony being a beneficial provision for the indigent (needy) spouse, can be invoked by either of the spouse, can be invoked by either of the spouse, where a decree of any kind governed by Sections 9 to 13 has been passed and marriage tie is broken, disrupted or adversely affected by such decree of the court,” Justice Dangre said, according to a report on LiveLaw.

Also read: Rule for shops to display name in Marathi reasonable: Bombay HC

The woman’s lawyer argued that once a marriage had ended, neither party had a right to claim any maintenance or alimony. The man’s counsel contested the argument and said that Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act did not provide for any restriction on the claim of maintenance or alimony in this way.

The man claimed that he had no source of income and he suffered from some health issues that had rendered him unfit for work. He said that the woman had completed her education and had become a teacher after their marriage.

“In order to encourage the wife (petitioner woman) to obtain the degree, he had managed the household affairs, keeping aside his own ambition,” the man said in his plea.

(With inputs from Agencies)