In a recent judgment with potential ramifications for maintenance disputes, the Supreme Court of India has directed a man to provide his divorced wife with a monthly alimony of Rs 50,000, coupled with a 5% increase every two years. The court's decision also reinforced a previous order mandating the ex-husband to clear the outstanding home loan and transfer the property entirely to his former wife.

The ruling came after the wife appealed to the apex court, seeking a revision of the alimony amount, which was initially set at Rs 20,000 per month as interim maintenance. She argued that her former husband's income had substantially increased since their separation, justifying a higher alimony to maintain a similar standard of living to that which she enjoyed during their marriage. Her legal team presented evidence of the man's successful career in hotel management and his increased earnings.

Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta presided over the bench that delivered the judgment. They emphasized that the divorced wife is entitled to a standard of living commensurate with what she experienced during her marriage. The court took note of the husband's career progression and income history, which at one point reflected annual earnings exceeding Rs 21 lakh. They stated that the revised alimony amount would reasonably secure her future, considering she has remained unmarried and financially independent since the divorce.

The husband had contested the alimony increase, citing a reduction in his current income, his remarriage, and additional responsibilities towards his elderly parents. However, the Supreme Court dismissed these arguments, asserting that past and potential earning capacity are crucial factors in determining maintenance obligations. The court cautioned against attempts to conceal income to evade or minimize alimony payments.

Furthermore, the court addressed the matter of maintenance for the couple's adult son, now 26 years old. While the court acknowledged the husband's argument that his son was no longer dependent and thus not entitled to regular maintenance, they clarified that the son's right to inheritance remained unaffected. The son retains the right to pursue claims to ancestral or other property in accordance with the law.

This Supreme Court ruling underscores the principle that divorced women are entitled to a standard of living that reflects their marital status and their former spouse's financial capacity. It serves as a reminder that courts will consider a spouse's potential earnings and past income when determining alimony, discouraging attempts to suppress income to reduce financial obligations. The decision also highlights the importance of ensuring financial security for divorced women who remain unmarried and independent, reinforcing their right to a dignified life post-divorce. The biennial increase provision further protects the wife from inflation and ensures that the alimony remains relevant over time.