A resident of the Udupi district submitted under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking alimony from their wife. (IANS) 
Women Empowerment

K'taka HC rejects the husband's request for alimony from the working wife

Karnataka High Court has quashed a man's petition seeking permanent alimony from his working wife.

NewsGram Desk

Karnataka High Court has quashed a man's petition seeking permanent alimony from his working wife.

"The husband with a capacity to earn does not have any right to ask for permanent alimony from his wife," the court underlined in its order.

A division bench headed by Justices Alok Aradhe and J. M. Khazi passed the order on Tuesday while taking up the petition of a resident of the Udupi district submitted under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking alimony from their wife.

When permanent alimony is sought, the properties and financial conditions of the two sides have to be considered. The husband's needs, and petitioners' income and assets need to be considered. In this case, during cross-examination, the petitioner has agreed that he has inherited land and also has a share in the house he is presently living in, the court observed.

The wife is working in a cooperative society and is taking care of the education of their 15-year-old son. She requires sufficient money to provide education to him and is single-handedly taking the responsibility, the bench said.

The counsel for the husband argued that the wife is working as an assistant manager in a cooperative society. (Pixabay)

However, the husband, who is demanding alimony, can earn and the decision of the family court to reject the alimony by the husband is upheld, the bench stated.

The counsel for the husband argued that the wife is working as an assistant manager in a cooperative society. The petitioner who worked as a security guard lost his job and was struggling for livelihood.

The advocate for the woman maintained that it is not possible to provide the alimony as she gets only Rs 8,000 as a salary.

The couple was married on March 25, 1993. The wife had left her husband before giving birth to her child. Even after their son was born, she did not return to him for many years. The husband had applied for divorce in the family court. He had also applied for permanent alimony. The family court had given divorce orders on August 19, 2015, and rejected the demand for alimony. (AA/IANS)

AI Speaks Volumes When It Comes to Detecting Parkinson's Disease

What's the story, morning glory?

US charges Indian billionaire Gautam Adani with fraud, conspiracy

Lifestyle & risk factor changes improved AFib symptoms, not burden, over standard care

Office Table Prices in the Philippines: What to Expect and Where to Find the Best Deals