Case at a Glance
In a wife's divorce case, the question of interim maintenance for her and the couple's two sons travelled through the Family Court and the Delhi High Court to the Supreme Court. The Court held that provident fund and employee stock purchase plan contributions are benefits for the husband, not mandatory deductions, while income tax and professional tax are. Taking into account the wife's serious illness, it raised the wife's maintenance to ₹30,000 a month and the children's to ₹75,000 per child from 1 January 2025.
Background
The parties married on 9 December 2004 in New Delhi according to Sikh rites and have two sons. The husband left on 21 June 2018. The wife filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act in 2019 and applied under Sections 24 and 26 for maintenance for herself and the children. On 8 January 2021 the Family Court refused maintenance to her but awarded each child ₹37,000 a month, later ₹40,000, and in July 2024 raised this to ₹50,000 per child.
After the wife was diagnosed with a serious illness in August 2024, the Delhi High Court directed ₹20,000 a month to her. In its final order of 14 August 2025, it estimated the husband's income at ₹4.5 lakh a month, deducted about ₹1.65 lakh, and raised maintenance to ₹1,25,000 a month. Both sides approached the Supreme Court.
The Question Before the Court
Can provident fund and ESPP contributions be deducted from a spouse's income when fixing maintenance, and was the quantum adequate?
What Counts as a Deduction
The Court accepted income tax and professional tax as mandatory deductions, but held that provident fund and employee stock purchase plan contributions are benefits that accrue to the husband and cannot reduce the income available for maintenance. On that basis, it found the quantum fixed below needed reconsideration.
The Court also took into account the wife's medical treatment costs and her reduced ability to meet any shortfall in the children's expenses. It raised the wife's maintenance to ₹30,000 a month and enhanced the children's maintenance to a total of ₹1,50,000 a month (₹75,000 per child) with effect from 1 January 2025, directed the husband to comply within three months, and disposed of the appeals.
What the Court Held
- Income tax and professional tax are mandatory deductions from income.
- Provident fund and ESPP contributions are benefits to the earner, not deductions for maintenance purposes.
- The wife's maintenance was raised to ₹30,000 a month in view of her illness and treatment costs.
- Child maintenance was enhanced to ₹75,000 per child from 1 January 2025, with compliance within three months.
Why It Matters
- It settles which salary deductions count when assessing a spouse's income.
- A parent's illness can increase the other parent's share of the children's costs.
- Interim maintenance under Sections 24 and 26 can be revised as circumstances change.
For Litigants / For Counsel
For litigants
- Savings deducted from salary may still be counted as your income.
- Tell the court promptly about any illness that affects your ability to support the children.
For counsel
- Separate statutory deductions from voluntary savings in salary slips.
- Seek enhancement when the recipient's circumstances change.
Key Takeaways
- PF and ESPP are not deductions.
- ₹75,000 per child per month.
- ₹30,000 per month for the wife.
- Effective from 1 January 2025.
FAQs
Which deductions are allowed?
The Court accepted income tax and professional tax as mandatory.
Why was the wife's maintenance raised?
Because of her illness and treatment costs.
From when do the higher amounts apply?
Child maintenance is enhanced from 1 January 2025.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court made clear that a spouse's savings cannot be used to shrink the income available for the family, and raised support for the wife and children accordingly.
Practical takeaway: in maintenance cases, only mandatory deductions reduce the paying spouse's income.