The Jharkhand High Court has held that while determining permanent alimony, courts must strike a balance between the dependent wife's financial security and the husband's ability to pay, observing that no fixed mathematical formula can determine the appropriate quantum. While upholding a Family Court decree dissolving the marriage, the Division Bench directed the husband to pay ₹30 lakh as permanent alimony after noting that his remarriage during the pendency of the appeal had ruled out any possibility of reconciliation between the parties.
Background of the Case
The appeal arose from a judgment of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Latehar, which had granted the husband a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion under Section 13(1)(i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The wife challenged that decision before the High Court. Since both parties' names were masked in the judgment, they are not disclosed here.
During the appeal, the Court noted that the husband had solemnised a second marriage after obtaining the divorce decree from the Family Court. In view of this development, the Bench recorded that reunion between the parties was no longer possible. Both sides also informed the Court that they would not press the appeal on the merits of the divorce decree and requested that the dispute be resolved on the issue of permanent alimony.
The wife stated through an affidavit that she was unemployed and only assisted her mother in running a roadside vegetable stall, earning about ₹200–300 per day. The husband disclosed that he was serving as a constable with a gross monthly salary of ₹66,097 and a net salary of ₹40,354 after deductions.
Court's Observations
The Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad undertook an extensive examination of the law governing permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Referring to several Supreme Court decisions, including Rajnesh v. Neha, Vinny Parmvir Parmar, Kiran Jyot Maini, and Pravin Kumar Jain, the Court reiterated that there is no fixed mathematical formula for determining permanent alimony.
The Bench observed that,
"The objective of granting interim/permanent alimony is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the failure of the marriage, and not as a punishment to the other spouse."
The Court further explained that maintenance must be assessed after considering the parties' financial status, earning capacity, standard of living during the marriage, future needs, and the paying spouse's obligations. It also emphasised that the assessment cannot rest on assumptions but must be based on the actual or reasonably ascertainable income of the spouse liable to pay maintenance.
Another significant observation made by the Bench was that the mere fact that a wife earns some income does not automatically disentitle her from claiming maintenance if such income is insufficient to maintain the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage.
As the Court noted,
"Maintenance... is not a matter of charity but of right a continuing obligation flowing from the marital relationship."
Assessment of Permanent Alimony
While determining the amount, the High Court considered the wife's age, her lack of independent financial resources, the husband's regular salary, and future inflation.
The Bench observed that the wife, aged about 28 years, would have to sustain herself for several decades and that maintenance should provide reasonable financial security. It also noted that although the husband had financial obligations, he remained responsible for ensuring that the wife could maintain a reasonable standard of living consistent with the marital relationship.
Balancing these factors, the Court concluded that a lump sum permanent alimony of ₹30 lakh would be just, fair and reasonable. The amount was directed to be paid in four equal instalments within twelve months, with the first instalment payable within two months. The Court also granted liberty to the wife to approach the appropriate court if the payment schedule was not complied with.
Court's Decision
The High Court affirmed the Family Court's decree dissolving the marriage and disposed of the wife's appeal.
However, it made the dissolution subject to payment of ₹30 lakh as permanent alimony in accordance with the schedule laid down by the Court.
Case Details
Case Title: XXX and YYY
Case Number: First Appeal No. 201 of 2025
Judge: Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad
Decision Date: 20 July 2026
