During a hearing on a divorce plea, the Supreme Court questioned a man’s claim that he could not afford to pay Rs 12,000 per month as maintenance to his wife because he earns only Rs 325 per day as a daily wager. The man told the court that even after working tirelessly throughout the month, he managed to earn only around Rs 9,000 and therefore could pay Rs 12,000 as maintenance.
A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta expressed disbelief over the claim, observing that it was difficult to accept that anyone earns so little in present times.
The bench remarked that it was hard to believe that any company would pay less than the minimum daily wage and even expressed its inclination to summon the firm, Hindustan Auto Agency, which the husband claimed employed him at such low wages. The court questioned which company pays such meagre wages today and said the assertion did not appear credible.
The husband’s counsel, George Pothan, defended his client’s statement, saying that the husband was truthfully disclosing his daily income and was ready to file an affidavit to that effect. However, the bench termed the claim “impossible” and made strong observations, stating that if the husband could not pay maintenance, he should keep his wife with him so that she could cook and support herself, the children, and him.
When the husband argued that his wife had filed complaints even against his parents, Justice Mehta responded sharply, saying that arranging money for the wife’s maintenance was his responsibility and that he must find means, even if it meant borrowing or seeking help, to fulfil that obligation.
When the court spoke of summoning the company, the husband’s lawyer remarked that such a move might benefit other employees as well. After hearing the arguments, the court reserved its judgment in the matter.
The lower court had earlier granted divorce upon payment of Rs 6 lakh to the wife. Dissatisfied with the amount, the wife approached the High Court and subsequently the Supreme Court seeking enhancement. She placed two options before the court: either the husband should pay Rs 12,000 per month for her lifetime with a fixed annual increase, or he should pay a lump sum amount of Rs 30 lakh.
– Ends
Published By:
Akshat Trivedi
Published On:
Mar 1, 2026 19:09 IST
Tune In
