The Delhi High Court in the case X v. Y observed and has stated that it is unfortunate that in matrimonial litigations, the parties do not come out with their true income.
The bench headed by Justice Navin Chawla in the case observed and has stated that the effort is always made to conceal the true income by the husband in order to avoid payment of maintenance to the wife and the child and on the other hand, the effort is made by the wife to claim exorbitant amount as the income of the husband.
The court in the case observed that it is based on the evidence produced before it, that the court has to make an assessment of the income of the husband for determining the maintenance payable to the wife and the child.
The court stated that some amount of guesswork is necessarily involved in such an exercise.
The bench of Justice Chawla in the case was dealing with the plea moved by husband wherein it challenged the family court order directing him to pay interim maintenance for an amount of Rs.10,000 per month to the wife and Rs.12,000 per month to the minor son, from the date of filing of the application for maintenance by the wife.
Further, the Family Court directed the husband to pay future maintenance regularly from January 2022 at the said rate.
It being the case of husband that he had filed his affidavit of income disclosing that he was earning only Rs.24,000 per month but later filed another affidavit stating that his income was only Rs.14,000 per month.
The husband in the plea stated that the Family Court, without any reason and only based on the conjectures and surmises, determined his income as Rs.70,000 per month, and directed him to pay maintenance amount to the wife and son.
The court stated that the husband, who was being present in court, was not in a position to deny that he was running a music academy and also performed across the country.
The bench headed by Justice Chawla in the case observed and has rejected the husband’s submission that he only earned Rs.14,000 per month from the said activities.
The court stated that the that his income was rightly determined for the interim as Rs.70,000 per month by the Family Court. The learned Family Court, while determining the maintenance payable to the respondents, has also observed that the respondent no.1 is not presently working anywhere. At present, the said circumstances are changed. Therefore, the new development and effect on the claim of maintenance of the respondents shall have to be considered by the learned Family Court on an appropriate application being moved by the petitioner seeking modification of the interim order.
The court in the case observed and has disposed of the plea wherein directing the the husband to clear all the arrears of maintenance at the rate as prescribed by the Family Court, within the period of eight weeks.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that the petitioner shall be at liberty to file an application before the learned Family Court seeking modification of the Impugned Order determining interim maintenance based on the changed circumstance that the respondent no.1 has now admittedly started to work and earn a living. The learned Family Court shall pass appropriate orders on such application.
Accordingly, the court disposed of the plea.
