Summary
The Supreme Court enhanced the permanent alimony awarded by the Calcutta High Court to a divorced wife from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 50,000 per month, holding that the husband's disclosed income and past earnings showed capacity to pay more and that the wife was entitled to maintenance reflecting the marital standard of living and inflation; no mandatory support was directed for the parties' adult son.
Issues
- Whether the permanent alimony of Rs. 20,000 per month (with a 5% increase every three years) fixed by the High Court on granting the husband's decree of divorce was adequate and required enhancement.
- Whether any further mandatory financial support should be directed for the parties' son, now aged 26.
Provisions considered
- Section 27, Special Marriage Act, 1954The husband's matrimonial suit for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty was filed under this provision; the Court's consideration was confined to the quantum of permanent alimony that followed the High Court's decree of divorce. (¶¶ 2.3, 3)
- Section 24, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955The wife's application for interim maintenance for herself and the minor son was made under this provision; the Court noted that the Rs. 20,000 figure the High Court made final had originated as interim maintenance. (¶¶ 2.4, 2.5, 5)
- Section 125, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Noted as part of the litigation history: the Trial Court had separately awarded the wife and minor son maintenance under this provision in 2014. (¶ 2.6)
Held
- The quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the High Court required revision. The husband's income, financial disclosures and past earnings established that he was in a position to pay a higher amount, while the wife, who had remained unmarried and lived independently, was entitled to maintenance reflecting the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage and reasonably securing her future; the inflationary cost of living and her sole reliance on maintenance necessitated reassessment. (¶ 7)
- A sum of Rs. 50,000 per month, subject to an enhancement of 5% every two years, was just, fair and reasonable to ensure the wife's financial stability; the High Court's order was modified to that extent. (¶¶ 8, 9)
- No further mandatory financial support was directed for the son, now aged 26, though the husband remained free to assist him voluntarily with educational or other reasonable expenses; the son's right of inheritance and any claim to ancestral or other property remained unaffected and could be pursued in accordance with law. (¶ 8)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court order modified so that permanent alimony payable to the appellant-wife is Rs. 50,000 per month with a 5% increase every two years; contempt petition to be disposed of accordingly; pending applications disposed of.