On December 10, the Supreme Court directed a husband to pay a one-time settlement of Rs. 5 Crores as permanent alimony to his wife upon the dissolution of their marriage. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale further underscored the husband’s obligation to provide for his child, directing him to allocate Rs. 1 Crore for the maintenance and financial security of their adult son.

The parties, married for six years, had been living separately for over two decades. The husband alleged that the wife exhibited hypersensitivity and treated his family with indifference, whereas the wife accused the husband of inappropriate behavior towards her. Considering the prolonged separation and the improbability of reconciliation, the Court deemed the marriage "irretrievably broken down."

Although additional issues under the Hindu Marriage Act relating to jurisdiction and interim maintenance were raised, the Court identified the determination of permanent alimony as the principal issue requiring adjudication. In arriving at its decision, the Court referred to precedents, including Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) and Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel (2024), outlining several factors to be considered in determining permanent alimony:

i. Status of the parties, social and financial.

ii. Reasonable needs of the wife and the dependent children.

iii. Parties' individual qualifications and employment statuses.

iv. Independent income or assets owned by the applicant.

v. Standard of life enjoyed by the wife in the matrimonial home.

vi. Any employment sacrifices made for the family responsibilities.

vii. Reasonable litigation costs for a non-working wife.

viii. Financial capacity of the husband, his income, maintenance obligations, and liabilities.

The Court emphasized that these factors serve as guidelines rather than rigid rules, noting that permanent alimony must ensure a reasonable standard of living for the wife without imposing an undue financial burden on the husband. "As held by us in Kiran Jyot Maine (Supra), it is also necessary to ensure that the amount of permanent alimony should not penalize the husband but should be made with the aim of ensuring a decent standard of living for the wife." The court held.

Considering the wife's status as an unemployed homemaker and the husband's employment as a manager in a foreign bank with a monthly income of Rs. 10–12 Lakhs, the Court held that Rs. 5 Crores was a just and appropriate one-time settlement.This decision underscores the principle of fairness and dignity in post-divorce financial arrangements, balancing the financial needs of the wife with the husband’s capacity to pay.

Case Title: PARVIN KUMAR JAIN VERSUS ANJU JAIN

Case No: SLP(C) No. 21710-21711 of 2024

Citation: 2024 INSC 961

Date: December-10-2024

Bench: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Prasanna B. Varale 

[Read/Download order]