NEW DELHI: There is a general tendency that a husband suppresses his true income to defeat the maintenance claims made by his wife, a court observed while adjudicating a domestic violence case. Accordingly, it directed a man to pay for his minor daughter’s monthly maintenance and take care of her educational expenses.
“It is observed by the metropolitan magistrate that the income of the appellant (husband) has fallen down when the litigation was filed by the respondent (wife) and the same has been done by him with a view to defeat the legitimate claim of maintenance of the respondent and her daughters,” noted Additional Sessions Judge Sanjeev Kumar.
The wife had filed a case against her husband under the Domestic Violence Act. By an order on June 2, 2015, a magistrate court had allowed the woman’s plea and directed the man to pay Rs 16,000 each to his two daughters.
Appealing before the sessions court, the man’s counsel submitted that the maintenance order did not take into account the man’s net income, and instead relied upon his gross income. The magistrate had found that between 2012 and 2014, the man’s income had fallen from Rs 46.59 lakh per annum in 2012 to Rs 4.43 lakh in 2014.
The sessions court noted the man’s income had fallen drastically when the case was filed by his wife.
Times of India Aug 8, 2017, Page 3