Alimony and Maintenance

Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria that reserves its order after offering the estranged wife a choice between a ₹4 crore lump sum or ownership of the flat, emphasizing dignity through self-reliance over exaggerated maintenance claims. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of X v. Y (2025). 

What was the Background of X v. Y (2025) Case ? 

• The couple was married for only 18 months before separating. 
• The husband sought annulment of the marriage, alleging that his wife was mentally ill and calling her "schizophrenic". 
• The woman denied these allegations, asking the court rhetorically if she appeared unwell. 
• The parties had initially agreed to a mutual consent divorce with a settlement agreement. 
• Under this agreement, the wife was to receive a flat at Kalpataru Habitat, Mumbai as full and final settlement. 
• Both parties were to withdraw over 20 pending cases between them. 
• However, after the First Motion for mutual consent divorce was allowed by a Delhi court, the wife withdrew her consent for the Second Motion, seeking a better financial settlement instead. 
  • She holds an MBA degree and has worked in the IT sector. 
• She was currently residing in the disputed Mumbai flat with two parking spots. 
• Her husband had filed FIRs against her, which she claimed affected her employability. 
• The husband's declared income was ₹2.5 crore with ₹1 crore in bonuses during 2015-16. 
• The husband came from considerable wealth, according to the woman. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court Bench, led by Chief Justice BR Gavai, was highly critical of the woman's demands: 
  • "Marriage lasted just 18 months. And you are seeking a crore a month?" 
  • The court questioned the quantum of demand (₹12 crore plus a Mumbai flat) given the brief marriage duration. 
• The court strongly emphasized that educated women should be self-reliant: 
  • "You are well educated. You should not be depending on handouts. You should earn and live with dignity" 
  • "You are employable in places like Bengaluru and Hyderabad. Why not work?" 
  • The court noted there was demand in IT centers and she should seek employment. 
• The court offered two alternatives: 
  • Accept the flat without any legal encumbrance, or 
  • Take a lump sum settlement of ₹4 crore. 
• The court was categorical that educated and capable individuals should not choose unemployment and then claim excessive maintenance. 
• The Bench emphasized the principle of self-reliance over dependency, particularly for qualified professionals. 

What are the Legal Provisions for Maintenance and Alimony under Different Personal Laws in India? 

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: 

• Section 24: Interim maintenance during pending proceedings. 
• Section 25: Permanent alimony and maintenance after divorce. 
• Applies to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. 
• Either spouse can claim maintenance. 

Special Marriage Act, 1954: 

• Section 36: Interim maintenance. 
• Section 37: Permanent alimony post-divorce. 
• Applies to inter-religious marriages. 
• Similar provisions to Hindu Marriage Act. 

Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (for Christians): 

• Section 36: Interim maintenance. 
• Section 37: Permanent alimony. 
• Courts consider the income/property of both spouses. 

Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936: 

• Section 39: Permanent alimony provisions. 
• A wife can claim maintenance after divorce. 
• Considers standard of living during marriage. 

Muslim Personal Law: 

• Based on Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. 
• Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. 
• Provides maintenance during iddat period. 

How do Indian Courts Determine the Quantum of Maintenance and Alimony under Hindu Personal Laws? 

Quantum of Maintenance Under Section 23 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956: 

• The determination of maintenance quantum under Section 23 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, follows a comprehensive assessment framework. Courts must evaluate the position and social status of both parties to ensure maintenance aligns with their living standards. 
• The reasonable needs and requirements of the claimant are carefully examined, considering whether separate living arrangements are justified under the circumstances. 
• Additionally, courts assess the claimant's existing financial resources, including property value, income sources, and personal earnings, while also considering the total number of persons entitled to maintenance under the Act to ensure fair distribution among all beneficiaries. 

Supreme Court's Flexible Guidelines for Alimony Determination: 

• The Supreme Court has established flexible principles rather than rigid formulas for determining alimony, emphasizing a holistic approach to maintenance settlements. 
• These guidelines consider the social and economic status of both spouses, the basic future needs of the wife and children, and the qualification and employment status of both parties.  
• Courts examine the means of income and property ownership, the wife's standard of living during marriage, and any employment sacrifices made for family responsibilities.  
• The guidelines also account for reasonable litigation costs for non-working wives and critically assess the husband's financial capacity and existing maintenance obligations to ensure fair and just settlements. 

Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act - Permanent Alimony Framework: 

• Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, provides a comprehensive framework for permanent alimony and maintenance after divorce or separation.  
• This provision allows either spouse to apply for maintenance, which can be awarded as a gross sum payment or through periodical payments for a term not exceeding the applicant's lifetime. 
• Courts exercise broad discretionary powers, considering the respondent's income and property, the applicant's financial position, the conduct of both parties, and other relevant circumstances.  
• The section also incorporates flexibility through modification provisions, allowing courts to vary or rescind maintenance orders due to changed circumstances, remarriage, or specific conduct issues.