Courts Supreme Court
Supreme Court: Wife's earnings not reason to halve father's child maintenance
This case concerns a dispute over interim maintenance for two minor daughters, where the Supreme Court reviewed whether the High Court erred in reducing the father's liability solely because the mother is also earning an income.
Who it concerns: Appellants: Sujata Kumari (wife) and two minor daughters; Respondents: Rahul Kumar (husband) and another; Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sanjeev Mehta.
What the court decided
- Set aside the High Court order dated 9th February 2026.
- Restore the Family Court order dated 21st October 2024 awarding Rs. 30,000 per month to each daughter.
- Direct the respondent-husband to pay any arrears within three months.
- Allow the appeal.
- Dispose of pending applications.
Also in the document
- The Court held that the wife's earnings are not, by themselves, a reason to halve the father's liability for maintenance.
- The Court noted that the main petition under Section 125 CrPC is still pending before the Family Court and must be decided on its own merits without being influenced by the interim order.
- The Court found the award of Rs. 60,000 per month (Rs. 30,000 per daughter) to be just and reasonable given the father's income of Rs. 2,00,000 per month.
How this was written
An AI model running on our own computer read the government document and wrote this summary. No person has checked it.
✓ Figures checked. Every number in this summary was found in the document by an automated check.
That check compares numbers only. It cannot confirm that the wording says what the document says — so the original document is always the authority.
The original document
Supreme Court of India — orders & judgments
Court order · 21 Aug 2026
Read it here
Discussion
No one has discussed this document yet.