#maintenance quantum

The Kerala High Court upheld a Rs.15,000/month child maintenance order, ruling that parental income, cost of living, and the child’s welfare justify the quantum without requiring itemized expense proofs. While both parents share liability, the court recognized the primary caregiver’s disproportionate burden as a legitimate factor in fixation - setting a clearer standard for family courts across India.

The Supreme Court ruled that a husband’s voluntary repayment of loans used to acquire assets cannot be counted as a reduction in his disposable income when calculating spousal maintenance under BNSS Section 144. This reinforces that maintenance must reflect true earning capacity and uphold the wife’s dignity, not shield assets through financial engineering.

Jharkhand High Court upholds a Rs. 30 lakh one-time alimony award, ruling that Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act mandates financial security aligned with the marital standard of living, not merely the husband's present earnings. The judgment reinforces that maintenance quantum must account for past lifestyle, not just current declarations.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that child maintenance under Section 125 CrPC must be calibrated to the child’s actual standard of living, educational needs, and inflationary pressures - not merely a fixed percentage of the father’s income. This shifts the legal standard from mechanical formulas to a dynamic, child-centric assessment, impacting all pending and future maintenance petitions across India.