The Karnataka High Court has set aside a family court order that dismissed a wife's petition seeking Rs 50,000 per month as interim maintenance and Rs 1 lakh towards litigation costs under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The high court observed that even if the family court believes the applicant may not ultimately succeed in the dispute, it cannot refuse interim maintenance and litigation expenses solely on that basis.
Background of the Case
On September 17, 2025, the family court rejected the wife's application, noting that the couple had lived together for only six to seven months and concluding that she was therefore not entitled to interim maintenance or litigation costs. The matter was then posted for the recording of evidence.
Challenging this order, the wife submitted that she is currently pursuing a BCom degree and is unemployed. She further stated that her husband works as an accountant in Dubai and earns approximately Rs 8 lakh per month. The husband contended that the wife's claims were false, asserting that she is gainfully employed and financially independent. He further submitted that, despite his repeated requests, she had refused to join him at the matrimonial home in Dubai.
High Court's Observations
After examining the material on record and provisions of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, Justice K Manmadha Rao observed that the primary objective of granting interim maintenance and litigation expenses is to provide financial support to the claimant spouse, enabling them to sustain themselves and effectively pursue legal proceedings. The high court noted that Section 24 does not prescribe any rigid formula for determining the quantum of interim maintenance. Instead, it must be assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account factors such as the duration of the marriage, the financial means and conduct of both spouses, their earning capacities, the responsibility of maintaining children, and the educational qualifications of the claimant.
Justice Rao observed that the discretion exercised by a family court must be judicial, not arbitrary, and should remain within the scope of Section 24, keeping in view the object of the Act and the settled principles of matrimonial law. While deciding an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the court is required to exercise its discretion on reasonable grounds in determining the amount of interim maintenance payable by one spouse to the other. The high court explained that such discretion must be based on a careful assessment of relevant factors, particularly the income of the spouse seeking interim maintenance and that of the spouse liable to pay, along with other surrounding circumstances.
Decision and Directions
The judge pointed out that, in the present case, the family court had failed to provide adequate reasons for rejecting the wife's application. Accordingly, the high court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the family court in Bengaluru. Both parties were directed to appear, either in person or through their counsel, on June 10, 2026, without further notice. The family court was further directed to allow both sides an opportunity to file objections to their respective affidavits of assets and liabilities, and to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.
