Request for maintenance rejected, Delhi HC said - Self-employed spouse cannot get financial assistance - Delhi HC no maintenance for self-employed spouses

Updated: Sat, 18 Oct 2025 23:24 (IST) Dismissing the claim for maintenance, the Delhi High Court said that the self-employed spouse is not entitled to financial assistance. The court explained that alimony is only for those who are unable to support themselves. The court dismissed the divorced woman’s petition because she was self-employed. Vineet Tripathi, New Delhi. In the case of claim for maintenance, the Delhi High Court, while passing an important decision, said that if the spouse is financially self-reliant and independent, then maintenance cannot be given to him. Genuine need must be demonstrated. The bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar said that it is settled principle that permanent alimony is intended as a measure of social justice and cannot be taken as a means of enriching or equalizing the economic condition of two able-bodied persons. The court emphasized that by law the person seeking alimony must prove that he really needs financial support. Remove advertisement Read news only Marriage broke up within 14 months The court made this comment while upholding a decision of the Family Court. In this, the family court refused to grant permanent maintenance to a wife and granted divorce to her husband on the ground of cruelty. According to the petition, the couple was previously divorced and this was his second marriage. They married in January 2010, but separated within 14 months. The wife is a Group-A officer in the Railways. The husband is an advocate and the wife was a Group-A officer of the Indian Railway Traffic Service (IRTS). The man accused the woman of mental and physical cruelty. He accused his wife of using abusive language and depriving him of conjugal rights and humiliating him in professional and social spheres. At the same time, the woman denied these allegations and accused her husband of cruelty. The decision about maintenance should be made judiciously. While upholding the decision of the family court, the bench said that judicial discretion under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act cannot be used to award maintenance. The bench said that the petitioner wife is financially self-reliant and independent and in such a case a decision should be taken judiciously based on the facts on record. There is no error in the court’s order. The family court, while granting the divorce, recorded that the wife had demanded Rs 50 lakh as a financial settlement for granting the divorce. This was stated in his affidavit and was also repeated during cross-examination. However, the family court refused to allow this. After considering the case, the bench said there was no error in the court order. The wife used derogatory language against her husband and abused her mother, amounting to mental cruelty. The bank rejected the woman’s claim for maintenance, saying she was a senior civil servant earning a decent income and was financially independent.