BENGALURU: When a woman is financially sound, her income is more than that of her husband and she has no other liabilities, like looking after children, courts should not be inclined to pass an order straightaway granting maintenance on the ground that a wife is required to be maintained by her husband, said the Karnataka High Court.
It added that the court should bear in mind that they have to award maintenance, either interim or final, only when it is shown that the wife has no financial sources to maintain herself according to the standards of her husband.
Dr Justice Chillakur Sumalatha passed the order, allowing a petition filed the 37-year-old husband from Gonikoppa, challenging an order dated December 19, 2025, passed by a trial court in Mysuru, which directed him to pay Rs 20,000 interim maintenance per month to the wife on the interlocutory application filed by her in a domestic violence dispute.
Woman earning Rs 1 lakh a month can maintain herself, says HC
“In the case on hand, the income of the wife is more than that of the husband. With her admitted income of Rs 1 lakh per month, she can maintain herself. Therefore, there is no requirement for the trial court to order the husband to pay a sum of Rs 20,000 per month out of his earnings of Rs 60,646 per month. Hence, this court is of the view that the order under challenge is unsustainable in the eye of law. Hence, the order of the trial court is set aside,” the court said.
Only because a woman, more particularly a wife, files a petition invoking the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act or the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act or the provisions contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, where the right to claim maintenance is recognised, the courts cannot straight away pass an order awarding some amount towards maintenance, it added.
The husband’s counsel contended that the couple got married in 2024 and the wife lived with him for two months. She later filed a false complaint. She is earning more than Rs 1 lakh per month, and, as per the tax deducted at source statement, her salary is Rs 1.64 lakh per month. The couple do not have any children. Except for maintaining herself, she has no other liabilities or obligations. The husband works in a private firm where he earns a salary of Rs 57,000 per month, which is lower than his wife’s salary. The trial court, however, passed the order for maintenance, the counsel argued.
The wife’s counsel contended that though she is earning around Rs 1 lakh per month, she is under obligation to clear all the debts which she incurred for her marriage and that was why the trial court passed the order for interim maintenance.
Analysing the affidavits of income and assets and liabilities filed by the husband and wife, the court noticed that the wife had not mentioned the details of the loans, when she obtained them, or what amount is still to be paid. But the trial court did not consider these facts, nor the salary drawn by her, and passed the impugned order, the court noted.
