Pune: In light of rising costs of essential goods and educational expenses, a Pune court has ordered a university professor to increase the alimony paid to his wife and daughter from ₹8000 to ₹35000 per month.
The decision by Additional Sessions Judge A.I. Perampalli brings significant relief to the wife and daughter.
In 2016, Tanishka (names changed) filed a petition for interim alimony under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, against her husband Tanmay.
The court granted her ₹8000 per month in alimony in November 2017 when their daughter Tanvi was three years old. Struggling with the meager alimony for her and her daughter's needs, Tanishka, through Advocate Vijay Rathod, applied to the Magistrate for an increase in alimony.
Tanmay’s lawyers opposed the application, arguing that Tanishka was postgraduate and capable of earning, and was intentionally delaying the hearing. Based on this, the Magistrate's court dismissed Tanishka's application.
Tanishka then challenged this decision through Advocate Rathod to the Additional Sessions Judge. They argued that Tanmay, a university professor earning more than ₹100,000 per month and also engaged in business, should increase the alimony due to the rising expenses for their now ten-year-old daughter's education, commuting, and medical treatment.
Tanmay's lawyers claimed that his disabled brother was dependent on him for livelihood. After hearing both sides, the court recognized the increased costs of essential goods and Tanmay's increased income and ruled in favor of increasing the alimony.
Court Finds Wife's Demand Justified
According to Tanmay's salary slip submitted to the court, he receives a monthly salary of ₹123,000 as per the Seventh Pay Commission. After deductions, his take-home salary is ₹83,275.
The wife and daughter were granted ₹8,000 in alimony in 2017. Given the current rise in the prices of essential goods and the increased income and living standards of the husband, the court observed that the demand to increase the alimony was justified.
