Supreme Court of India
VINNY PARMVIR PARMARversusPARMVIR PARMAR
- Citation
- 2011 INSC 507
- Decided
- 20 July 2011
- Disposal
- Case Partly allowed
- Bench
- P SATHASIVAM
Holding
Maintenance must be fixed based on the parties' actual financial capacities and needs, and in this case the appropriate amount is Rs.40,000 per month (or Rs.40 lakh lump sum).
Summary
The parties dissolved their marriage by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Family Court fixed a maintenance of Rs.20,000 per month for the wife, which the High Court affirmed and also ordered an alternative lump‑sum alimony of Rs.20 lakh. Unsatisfied, the wife appealed for a higher amount. The Supreme Court examined Section 25 of the Act, emphasizing that no rigid formula exists for alimony; the court must consider the income and property of both parties, their conduct, needs, status, and other circumstances such as the husband’s remarriage and parental obligations. Noting that the wife had previously earned a substantial salary as an air‑hostess but was unemployed at the time of the petition, and that the husband earned a significant salary and owned property, the Court enhanced the monthly maintenance to Rs.40,000 and, alternatively, fixed a lump‑sum alimony of Rs.40 lakh. The appeals were partly allowed.
Issues considered
- What amount of permanent alimony and maintenance is reasonable under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, given the parties' respective incomes, assets, and circumstances?
Legislation cited
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955s. 13-B, s. 25
Subjects
maintenancepermanent alimonyHindu Marriage ActSection 25divorce by mutual consentalimony calculationspousal support
Judgment
[2011] 9 S.C.R. 371
" >- VINNY PARMVIR PARMAR A
v.
PARMVIR PARMAR
(Civil Appeal Nos. 5831-33 of 2011)
JULY 20, 2011
\ B
[P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. 8.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.]
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955:
s. 25 rlw s. 13-B - Decree of divorce by mutual consent - c
Permanent alimony and maintenance - Factors to be
considered by the court - Maintenance of wife fixed by Family
Court at Rs.20,0001- per month - High Court, as an
~
alternative also fixed permanent alimony at Rs.40 lakh in
. .lump-sum to be paid by the husband to the wife - Appeal by D
wife - HELD: No fixed formula can -be laid for fixing the
amount of maintenance - It has to be in the nature of things
which depend on various facts and circumstances of each
case - It is relevant to point out that the status and mode of
life of the claimant when she lived with her husband is also
E
one of the relevant factors for determining the amount of
maintenance - In the instant case, the wife was working as Air
Hostess with Cathay Pacific Airlines and getting sizeable
income and after the marriage, at the instance of the husband,
-j she resigned from her job - Considering the conditions
' prescribed in s. 25 relating to claim of permanent alimony/ F
maintenance and the facts that as on date the wife is not
permanently employed and is living with her sister at Mumbai
and she does not possess any immovable property at
Mumbai, the husband's income from salary as Sr.
Commander in Air India, other properties standing in his G
name, his age being 42 years, future employment prospects
and also considering the fact that he has re-married, has a
child and has also to look after his parents, the ends of justice
would be met by fixing maintenance at the rate of Rs.40,0001
371 H
372 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 9 S.C.R.
A - per month - In the alternative, the amount of permanent
alimony/ maintenance is fixed at Rs. 40 lakhs in lump sum
to be paid by the husband to the wife which will forfeit all her
claims.
In the appeals filed before the High Court against the
8
order of the Family Court, the divorce petition of the
respondent-husband was converted into divorce by
mutual consent and the marriage was dissolved by a
decree uls 13-8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The
Family Court had fixed maintenance to be paid to the wife
C at Rs. 20,000/- per month which was affirmed by the High
Court. While disposing of the appeals, as an alternative
measure, the High Court also fixed the amount of
permanent alimony at Rs. 20 lakhs in lump sum to be paid
by the husband to the wife. Being not satisfied with the
D amount of maintenance fixed, the wife filed the instant
appeals for enhancement.
The only point for consideration before the Court
was: what would be the reasonable amount the appellant-
E wife was entitled by way of maintenance from the
husband in terms of s. 25 of the Act.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 As per s. 25, of the Hindu Marriage Act,
F 1955, while considering the claim for permanent alimony
and maintenance of either spouse, the respondent's own
income and other property, and the income and other
property of the applicant are all relevant material in
addition to the conduct of the parties and other
G circumstances of the case. It is further seen that the court
considering such claim has to consider all the relevant
materials and determine the amount which is to be just
for living standard. No fixed formula can be laid for fixing
the amount of maintenance. It has to be in the nature of
H things which depend on various facts and circumstances
VINNY PARMVIR PARMAR v. PARMVIR PARMAR 373
of each case. The court has to consider the status of the A·
parties, their respective needs, the capacity of: the .
husband to pay, having regard to reasonable expenses ,
for his own maintenance and· others whom he is obliged'
to maintain under the law and statute. The court also has ·
\ to take note of the fact that the amount of maintenance~ B-
fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in
reas·onable comfort considering her status and mode of
life she was used to live when she lived with her
husband. At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot
be excessive or affect the living condition of the other c
party. [para 12) (379-B-E]
Shri Bhagwa(I Dutt vs. Smt. Kam/a Devi and. Anr. 1975
=
(2) SCR 483 (1975) 2 sec 386; Chatµrbhuj vs. Sita Bai,
2007 (12) SCR 577 = (2008) 2 sec 316 - relied on.
D
1.2 In the instant case, it is· not in dispute that before
the· marriage, the appellant-wife was working as Air
Hostess with Cathay Pacific Airlines and getting sizeable
income. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that
after marriage, at the instance of the respondent, she E
resigned from her job. The particulars furnished also
show that as on date she is living with her sister at
Mumbai and she does not possess any immovable
property at Mumbai. [para 13) [379-F-G]
1.3 In the light of the details furnished by both the F
parties, the Court is of the view that the amount of Rs.
1,40,000/- determined as net monthly income of the
respondent-husband is not acceptable. Equally, direction
for payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per
month to the appellant-wife is also inadequate. G
Considering the conditions prescribed in s. 25 of the Act
relating to claim of permanent alimony/maintenance and
the fact that the appellant is not permanently employed
as on date and is residing with her sister at Mumbai,
taking note of the respondent's income from salary as Sr. H
374 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 9 S.C.R.
A Commander in Air India, other properties standing in his
name, his age being 42 years, futur~· employment
prospects and also considering the fact that the
respondent has re-married, has a child and has also to
look after his parents, the ends of justice would be met
B by fixing the maintenance at Rs.40,000/- per month. The
same shall be payable from the date of her application
I
and shall be continued to be paid in terms of s. 25 of the
Act. It is made clear that if there is any change in the
circumstance of either party, they are free to approach the
c court concerned to modify or rescind the order. In the
alternative, the amount of permanent alimony/
maintenance is fixed at Rs. 40 lakhs in lump sum to be
paid by the respondent to the appellant which will forfeit
all her claims. The respondent is free to opt any one mode
t
to comply with the same. [para 15] [380-E-H; 381-A-D]
0
Case Law Reference:
1975 (2) SCR 483 relied on para 10
2007 (12) SCR 577 relied on para 11
E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
5831-5833 of 2011.
From the Judgment & Order dated 24.04.2009 of the High
Court of Bombay in the matter of Family Court Appeal No. 110
F of 2004 and 127 of 2004 read with the Review Order dated \
17.07.2009 passed in Review Petition Stamp No. 15671 of
2009.
Nidish Gupta, D.K. Monga, Vivek Sharma, Naresh Bakshi,
Arun Monga for the Appellant.
G
lndu Malhotra, Prena Priyadarsani, Vikas Mehta for the
Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
H P. SATHASIVAM, J. 1. Leave granted.
VINNY PARMVIR PARMAR v. PARMVIR PARMAR 375
[P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
.J-· 2. These appeals are filed against the final order dated A
24.04.2009 passed by the High Court of Bombay in Family
Court Appeal Nos. 11 Oof 2004 and 127 of 2004 and the order
dated 17.07.2009 in Review Petition Stamp No. 15671 of 2009
whereby the appellant's appeal was dismissed in entirety and
\ the petition filed by the respondent in Family Court for divorce
on ground of cruelty was converted into divorce by mutual
B
consent and the marriage was dissolved by a decree under
Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter
referred to as "the Act").
3. Since the parties have dissolved their marriage by c
consent and a fresh decree of divorce by consent has been
directed, the other question adjudicated before the High Court
was about the amount of maintenance/permanent alimony in
•... terms of Section 25 of the Act. By the impugned order, the High
Court confirmed the order passed by the Family Court fixing D
the amount of permanent alimony at Rs. 20,000/- per month.
While disposing of the appeals, as an alternative measure, the
High Court· also fixed the amount of permanent alimony at Rs.
20 lakhs in lump sum to be paid by the husband to his wife within
a period of 3 months from the date of the order. Being not E
satisfied with the maintenance fixed at Rs. 20,000/- per month,
the appellant-wife filed these appeals for enhancement by
pointing out her difficulties and the income of the respondent.
I
~ 4. Heard Mr. Nidish Gupta, learned senior counsel for the F
appellant-wife and Ms. lndu Malhotra, learned senior counsel
for the respondent-husband.
5. The only point for consideration in these appeals is what
would be the reasonable amount the appellant-wife is entitled
_,,, by way of maintenance from the husband in terms of Section G
25 of the Act.
6. Considering the fact that after the marriage the appellant
herein resigned from the post of Air Hostess in Cathay Pacific
Airlines and after dispute between them she was not employed H
376 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011) 9 S.C.R.
A and getting regular income, she was staying with her sister at
Mumbai and also taking note of the financial status of the
husband, namely, his salary as a Sr. Commander in Air India
and rental income from his properties, the Family Court fixed
maintenance at Rs. 20,000/- per month which was affirmed by
B the High Court. While arriving at such amount, the Family Court 1
has determined the income of the husband as Rs. 1,40,000/-
per month.
Discussion:
C 7. Mr. Nidish Gupta, learned senior counsel for the
appellant, by drawing our attention to various factual details
placed before the Family Court, High Court and in this Court,
submitted that from the salary slips it is seen that even after
income tax deductions the respondent's income from salary
D and allowances alone for the period 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010
was Rs. 83, 19,031/-. In support of the above claim, the appellant
has produced TDS certificate issued by his employer/the
Income-Tax Department. According to him, apart from the
above salary income, the respondent has rental income
E between Rs. 7,20,000 and Rs. 10,80,000 from his properties.
He further highlighted that in addition to the salary and the rental
income, the respondent has huge bank deposits, investment
in shares and mutual funds. He also highlighted that the
respondent being 42 years of age and a Sr. Commander in
F Air India has a promising career with bright chances of further
promotions. With these facts and figures, Mr. Nidish Gupta
prayed for intervention of this Court by fixing reasonable amount
towards maintenance and welfare of the appellant.
8. In reply to the same, Ms lndu Malhotra, learned senior
G counsel for the respondent-husband submitted that the figures
furnished by the appellant before the courts below as well as
in this Court are exaggerated. In any event, according to her,
the income shown above includes allowance and other benefits
which cannot be construed as actual salary or income as
H claimed. She also pointed out that apart from the salary from
VINNY PARMVIR PARMAR v. PARMVIR PARMAR 377
[P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
,,..,_
Air India he owns 1 acre of land in Pune and 1 Bedroom flat in A
Mumbai. All other properties, according to the learned senior
counsel, belong to his father and he is not entitled for anything
from it at this moment. She further highlighted that at present
respondent-husband has married and having a child apart from
\ ~ taking care of his parents. She finally submitted that the amount B
determined by the Family Court as affirmed by the High Court
is quite reasonable and, therefore, there is no valid ground for
interference by this Court exercising jurisdiction under Article
136 of the Constitution of India.
9. Before considering the rival claims based on facts and c
figures, it is useful to refer to Section 25 of the Act which reads
as under:-
¥
... "25. Permanent alimony and maintenance.- (1) Any
court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time D
of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto,
on application made to it for the purpose by either the wife
or the· husband, as the case may be, order that the
respondent shall pay to the applicant for her or his
maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly E
or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the .
applicant as, having regard to the respondent's own
income and other property, if any, the income and other
4
property of the applicant, the conduct of the parties and
' other circumstances of the case, it may seem to the court
F
to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if
necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the
respondent.
(2) If the court is satisfied that there is a change in the
v
-) circumstances of either party at any time after it has made G
an order under sub-section (1), it may, at the instance of
either party, vary, modify or rescind any such order in such
. manner as the court may deem just.
(3) If the court is satisfied that the party in whose favour
H
378 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 9 S.C.R.
A an order has been made under this section has remarried
or, if such party is the wife, that she has not remained
chaste, or, if such party is the husband, that he has had
sexual intercourse with any woman outside wedlock, it may
at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind
B any such order in such manner as the Court may deem
•
just."
~O. In Shri Bhagwan Dutt vs. Smt. Kam/a Devi and Anr,
(1975) 2 SCC 386, though this Court has considered the
amount of maintenance payable to wife under Section 488 of
c the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, the principle laid down
is applicable to the case on hand. In para 19, this Court held:
"19. The object of these provisions being to prevent
vagrancy and destitution, the Magistrate has to find out as
to what is required by the wife to maintain a standard of
•
D
living which is neither luxurious nor penurious, but is
modestly consistent with the status of the family. The needs
and requirements of the wife for such moderate living can
be fairly determined, only if her separate income, also, is
E taken into account together with the earnings of the
husband and his commitments."
11. In Chaturbhuj vs. Sita Bai, (2008) 2 SCC 316, which
also relates to maintenance claim by deserted wife under
Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The \
\
F following statement in para 8 is relevant which reads as under:
"..... Where the personal income of the wife is insufficient
she can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The
test is whether the wife is in a position to maintain herself
G in the way she was used to in the place of her husband. In
Bhagwan Dutt v. Kam/a Devi it was observed that the wife
should be in a position to maintain a standard of living
which is neither luxurious nor penurious but what is
consistent with status of a family. The expression "unable
H to maintain herself does not mean that the wife must be
VINNY PARMVIR PARMAR v. PARMVIR PARMAR 379
[P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
absolutely destitute before she can apply for maintenance A
under Section 125 CrPC."
12. As per Section 25, while considering the claim for
permanent alimony and maintenance of either spouse, the
\ .. respondent's own income and other property, and the income B
and other property of the applicant are all relevant material in
addition to the conduct of the parties and other circumstances
of the case. It is further seen that the court considering such
claim has to consider all the above relevant materials and
determine the amount which is to be just for living standard. No
fixed formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance.
c
It has to be in the nature of things which depend on various
facts and circumstances of each case. The court has to
• consider the status of the parties, their respective needs, the
.... capacity of the husband to pay, having regard to reasonable
expenses for his own maintenance and others whom he is D
obliged to maintain under the law and statute. The courts also
have to take note of the fact that the amount of maintenance
fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in reasonable
comfort considering her status and mode of life she was used
to live when she lived with her husband. At the same time, the E
amount so fixed cannot be excessive or .affect the living
condition of the other party. These are all the broad principles
courts have to be kept in mind while determining maintenance
or permanent alimony.
F
13. It is not in dispute that before their marriage, the
appellant-wife was working as Air Hostess with Cathay Pacific
Airlines and getting sizeable income. It is also brought to our
notice that after marriage, at the instance of the respondent,
-I
.. she resigned from her job. The particulars furnished also show G
that at present she is living with her.sister at Mumbai and she
does not possess any immovable property at Mumbai.
14. According to the respondent-husband, at the time of
filing of petition under Section 25, she suppressed her
employment and income thereon and on this ground her entire H
380 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 9 S.C.R.
A case has to be rejected. The fact remains, though she was
employed for a shorter period which was not stated so
subsequently, she clarified that she had earned only an amount
of Rs. 1.5 lakhs from casual assignments from July, 2004 to
September, 2009. She also asserted that her income was not
B fixed or regular and she is struggling to take up casual ,,
assignments of interior decoration even though she was not
formally trained for the same. She also explained that at
particular time her employment with JJ Valaya Couture was only
transitory in nature and was not permanent, it was not a source
c of regular and permanent income for her and that she had not
been issued even any letter of appointment setting out the terms
of employment and she further explained that at the relevant
time she was earning an ad hoc remuneration of Rs. 20,000/-
per month. There is no reason to either reject or disbelieve her
0 explanation. In the same way, though she had highlighted salary
income of the respondent, admittedly, those figures include
allowances and other payments under various heads of salary.
The respondent has also placed certificates from income tax
authorities such as Form 16C etc.
E 15. In the light of the details furnished by both the parties,
we are of the view that the amount of Rs. 1,40,000/- determined
as net monthly income of the respondent-husband is not
acceptable. Equally, direction for payment of maintenance at
the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per month to the appellant-wife is also
F inadequate. It is relevant to point out that the status of the
appellant before her marriage is also one of the relevant factors
for determining the amount of maintenance. It is not in dispute
that before her marriage with the respondent, she was working
as an Air Hostess in Cathay Pacific Airlines and after marriage
G she resigned from the said post. Considering the conditions
prescribed in Section 25 of the Act relating to claim of
permanent alimony/maintenance and the fact that the appellant
is not permanently employed as on date and residing with her
sister at Mumbai, taking note of the respondent's income from
H salary as Sr. Commander in Air India, other properties standing
VINNY PARMVIR PARMAR v. PARMVIR PARMAR 381
[P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
in his name, age being 42 years, future employment prospects A
and also considering the fact that the respondent re-married,
having a child and also to look after his parents, we feel that
the ends of justice would be met by fixing maintenance at the
rate of Rs.40,000/- per month instead of Rs.20,000/- per month
\ .. as fixed by the Family Court and affirmed by the High Court. B
The same shall be payable from the date of her application and
continue to pay in terms of Section 25 of the Act. The
respondent is granted one year time from 01.08.2011 to pay
all the arrears payable in six equal instalments. It is made clear
that if there is any change in the circumstance of either party, c
they are free to approach the Court concerned to modify or
rescind. As suggested and fixed by the High Court, in the
alternative, we fix the amount of permanent alimony/
maintenance at Rs. 40 lakhs in lump sum to be paid by the
respondent within a period of six months from 01.08.2011 0
which will forfeit all her claims. The respondent is free to opt
any one mode to comply with the same. If the respondent opts
the first method, the same is subject to the conditions
prescribed in sub-Section (3) of Section 25 of the Act. The
appeals are allowed to the extent mentioned hereinabove. No E
order as to costs.
R.P. Appeals Partly allowed.
-I
'
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "maintenance"Sign in to search