Cannot run away giving excuses: Delhi court junks plea challenging monthly maintenance to estranged wife

The woman, in this case, had filed a case against her husband under the Protection of Women from domestic violence Act, 2005. A Mahila Court passed an order directing the husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs 6,500, which was challenged by the husband.

The woman had claimed that her husband lived with his family in a mansion in a posh locality in south Delhi and had an income of Rs 2 lakh. She also submitted that her husband’s family owned a milk vending booth under the Delhi Milk Scheme (DMS) in the area and are “enjoying all comforts of life.”

The husband, on the other hand, argued that he had to take care of his parents and had no income after his shops closed down. He argued that he is “barely managing his livelihood” and that the Mahila Court passed the order “irrationally”.

DSJ Kumar, in his order, said that the trial court has rightly observed that the aspect of financial deprivation of women is included in the category of economic abuse.

“It is pertinent to mention that an aggrieved woman needs economic support in view of the domestic violence perpetrated upon her by a person, who is in domestic relation with her…It is settled law that every able-bodied person is bound to maintain his wife and cannot run away from this responsibility by giving excuses,” the court said.