Maintenance is not a bounty

No Maintenance to Able Bodied Educated Women:
As per newspaper report (Times of India, 14.05.2009), the District Court in Delhi Refused maintenance to a wife who was found able bodied and educated. Justice Rajendra Shastri said,
“An able bodied person expected to maintain himself and family members depended on him. The same is equally applicable to his wife. In an advanced society like ours, a woman who is young, healthy and well versed cannot afford to sit idle, particularly when facing difficult circumstances, as the applicant in this case.”
The judgment is also took into consideration the applicant wife conduct like elopement of wife with his lover, abandonment of minor child and health of the husband. Nevertheless, the judgment is a step towards making maintenance laws, what it is.
Maintenance is not a bounty. It is not a birth right of a wife. It cannot be claimed as a matter of right. It is for a women, who cannot maintain herself & who has done the duties of a pious wife, to claim from her husband. Any women who has not done the duty of a pious wife, must not be entitled to claim maintenance from her husband. The other point is “ability to maintain herself”. A young healthy women, who is educated (even when not educated, can work as maid- many uneducated women are maintaining themselves that way) cannot be classified to be not able to maintain herself. The test is , whether a women of applicants ability is able to maintain themselves in the society or not- if yes, no maintenance- if no, there is a case for maintenance.
Maintenance laws needs to be applied strictly and in rare circumstances. It is usurpation of fruits of labour of a man in the guise of gender biased welfare laws. Such usurpation cannot be allowed to be made in a routine manner.


Tags: , , ,

One Response to “Maintenance is not a bounty”

  1. Rajesh Kumar Says:–of-salary-as-maintenance/49

    A city court has ordered a man to pay maintenance of more than half of his monthly salary to his wife after divorce. Manoj Rathi, who earns Rs 2,000 a month, was asked by Judge Vineeta Goyal to give his wife Rs 1,200 for the maintenance of their child after divorce on July

    Ironically, the wife, Nalini, earns Rs 9,000 per month, which is almost five
    times her husband’s salary. Nalini had filed a petition against Rathi under the Hindu Marriage Act to pass a decree of divorce and to receive maintenance for their child. She had alleged that her husband mistreated her and her family and demanded excessive dowry and gifts. Nalini also claimed that she was beaten by her husband when she refused
    get the dowry. Rathi has agreed to pay the maintenance amount as well as the arrears within three months from the date.
    Such maintenance law is nothing but extortion laws in disguise.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: