A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal of Delhi High Court while upholding a family court order dismissed the maintenance petition of wife.

Justice held that wife cannot be entitled for maintenance if she is highly qualified and has been earning, but not disclosing her true income.

“We find that in the present case it is not only that the appellant is highly qualified and has an earning capacity, but in fact she has been earning, though has not been inclined to truthfully disclose her true income. Such a person cannot be held entitled to maintenance.”

Wife sought an interim maintenance of Rs 35,000 per month from the husband including litigation expenses of Rs 55,000.

The family court rejected the maintenance petition of the wife in view of that she had been working even after marriage and having high qualification, after which she appealed in the High Court.

The bench noted that the husband is a simple graduate, while wife had completed her Ph.D with professional qualification in computers and had been working even at the time of her marriage.

While dismissing the appeal, the bench said that “Pertinently, the claim for maintenance by the appellant under the provisions of Protection of Women against Domestic Violence Act has also met the met the same fate and the maintenance has been declined to her. We, therefore, find no merit in the Appeal which is hereby dismissed.”

“We on the facts as narrated above, agree with the conclusions of the learned Principal Judge, Family Courts that the appellant not only is a highly qualified lady, but has been working even at the time of her marriage and thereafter. The documents and the admissions made by the appellant clearly lead to an irresistible conclusion that she is employed in the office of the M.P”.