The Karnataka High Court has refused to increase the maintenance amount granted to a woman under the Domestic Violence Act, observing that the wife was earning a handsome salary while the husband claimed to be unemployed.
At the same time, the court also declined relief to the husband, who had sought cancellation of an earlier order directing him to pay maintenance.
Court dismisses pleas from both sides
Justice V Srishananda dismissed revision petitions filed by both parties challenging a 2015 Family Court order.
The lower court had directed the husband to pay ₹5,000 per month towards rent, ₹4,000 per month as maintenance, and ₹40,000 as compensation.
Marriage dispute reached court
The couple married in April 2009. The wife alleged repeated dowry demands and physical as well as mental harassment.
Her petition under the Domestic Violence Act was partly allowed in 2015, and the husband was restrained from committing any act of domestic violence.
Husband claimed he was jobless
Before the High Court, the husband argued that he had earlier run a school but had since shut it down and was now jobless, making it difficult to pay maintenance.
He also argued that the wife reportedly earns more than ₹1.5 lakh per month and therefore was not entitled to higher maintenance.
Court notes both financial positions
The wife contended that her husband owned property and was hiding material facts from the court.
The High Court observed that the husband had one acre of land, which had been mortgaged on more than one occasion. The court noted that if he could raise loans against property but failed to pay maintenance, it suggested unwillingness rather than inability.
However, the court also held that since the wife was financially independent and there were no children from the marriage, there was no justification to enhance maintenance.
Final ruling
Finding no merit in either petition, the High Court dismissed both pleas and allowed the earlier maintenance order to continue.