Royal family heir asked to pay Rs 6 crore alimony

In an order on Monday, family court judge S A Morey dissolved the marriage observing, “Taking into consideration their ages, family background, tendency of respondent (man) to hide his income, in my view the petitioner (woman) is entitled for Rs 6 crores for herself and Rs 5 crores for her daughter. Out of the amount of daughter, the petitioner shall deposit Rs 3.5 crores in fixed deposit exclusively in the name of the daughter.”

The woman is free to use the remaining Rs. 1.5 crore for her daughter’s expenses.

The couple who married in 1995 had been living separately since 2010. They lived in New York until 2006 and shifted to Mumbai after the man, now 51 years old, was appointed CEO and managing director of the Indian operations of an American equity firm. However, he was fired in 2010 and has been unemployed since. The woman said she runs her expenses through rent from a property in Bangalore and a 10% share in a firm owned by her mother.

In 2005, the woman was arrested in New York for assaulting her husband. The man has been charged of insulting the woman’s family, and slamming a bathroom door on her arm in 2011. She accused him of “turning their daughter against her”.

Stating in her application that her income in 2010-11 was Rs 2.71 lakh, the woman said she was “entitled to the same standard of living as she has been accustomed to.”

Documents filed by the man in court show he spends Rs 7.25 lakh a month on rent for two apartments in Malabar Hill and New York. The court concluded he had a “luxurious and affluent lifestyle.”

“It is clear from rent and expenses of the respondent that every month, he spends more than Rs 10,00,000/- for the above purpose,” Judge Moray observed.

The court took into account properties owned by the man’s mother, which are valued at Rs 600 crore, though the man denied he would inherit them.

The court, however, termed the woman’s submission of requiring between Rs 3 and 4 lakh for personal expenses and Rs 1.2 lakh per month for her daughter as exaggerated.

“Admittedly the break-up given by the petitioner is not justifiable…” the judge observed. The man had sought to show she was unwilling to work though qualified. The court accepted her submission that she was unable to work after undergoing several neurosurgeries for seizures.

He said she owned assets worth Rs 3.45 crore. Arguing against giving maintenance, he also said that he his wife had set up a fund of Rs 67 lakh for the education of their daughter.