It is no answer to a claim of maintenance that the wife is educated and could support herself

Manish Jain v. Akansha Jain– In this recent case, decided by the Supreme Court the Court was confronted with the issue of grant of maintenance pendent lite under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which provides for maintenance pendent lite and expenses of proceedings.

In context of award of maintenance under Section 24, the Bench made some noteworthy observations in the case which are enumerated below:

• That the Court exercises a wide discretion in the matter of granting alimony pendentelite but the discretion is judicial and neither arbitrary nor capricious.
• That the Court is to be guided, on sound principles of matrimonial law and to be exercised within the ambit of the provisions of the Act and having regard to the object of the Act.
• That the Court would not be in a position to judge the merits of the rival contentions of the parties when deciding an application for interim alimony and would not allow its discretion to be fettered by the nature of the allegations made by them and would not examine the merits of the case.
• That Section 24 of the HM Act lays down that in arriving at the quantum of interim maintenance to be paid by one spouse to another, the Court must have regard to the appellant’s own income and the income of the respondent.
• That an order for maintenance pendentelite or for costs of the proceedings is conditional on the circumstance that the wife or husband who makes a claim for the same has no independent income sufficient for her or his support or to meet the necessary expenses of the proceeding.
• That it is no answer to a claim of maintenance that the wife is educated and could support herself. Likewise, the financial position of the wife’s parents is also immaterial.
• That the Court must take into consideration the status of the parties and the capacity of the spouse to pay maintenance and whether the applicant has any independent income sufficient for her or his support.
• That Maintenance is always dependent upon factual situation; the Court should, therefore, mould the claim for maintenance determining the quantum based on various factors brought before the Court.