Wife sought further enhancement of maintenance beyond Rs.20,000/- per month awarded by the Family Court under Section 127 CrPC. The High Court held the graded enhancement proportionate to the husband's increased salary under the Annurita Vohra resource-division principle; son's claim failed for lack of evidence of incapacity.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~60
Through: Dr. Ajay Chaudhary, Mr. Bharat Chaudhary, Ms. Vinita, Ms. Monika and Mr. Vishesh Kumar, Advocates.
Versus LAL JEE .....Respondent Through: None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 22.04.2025
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 1 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
present petition, is as follows:
2.1 The Petitioner and the Respondent got married on 20th June, 1995, and from this marriage, a son was born on 20th March, 1996. However, due to certain temperamental differences and other reasons, the Petitioner and Respondent eventually separated, and have been living separately since 31st December, 1999. The child turned major in the year 2014.
2.2 Subsequently, the Petitioner, along with her son, filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732 against the Respondent, seeking maintenance. The said application was allowed by judgment dated 16th December 2010, whereby a total maintenance of INR 6,000/- per month was awarded to the Petitioner and her son, with effect from the date of filing the petition, i.e. , 3rd June, 2000. Additionally, the Respondent was directed to pay INR 5,000/- towards litigation expenses.
2.3 Subsequently, on 21st May 2019, the Petitioner filed an application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. [MT No. 236/2019], seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount on account of a change in circumstances and the increased cost of living in Delhi. The aforesaid application was decided through the impugned order, allowing the Petitioner’s request in the following terms:
“22. In view of the above discussion, the following directions are issued in the present case :
(a) the respondent shall pay an amount of Rs.14,000/- per month to the petitioner as maintenance from the date of filing of the present petition i.e. 21.05.2019 till this month and thereafter, he shall continue to pay her the maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- per month.
(b) it is made clear that the monthly amount of Rs. 6,000 /- which she has received from respondent towards the maintenance shall be adjusted towards the enhanced maintenance awarded to her.
1 “BNSS”
2 “CrPC”
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 2 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
(c) petitioner shall get the aforesaid maintenance from the respondent during her lifetime or till she gets remarried after divorce or the law permits.
(d) any amount paid by the respondent as maintenance in any other proceedings for the period in question shall be liable to be adjusted in the maintenance amount awarded to the petition.
(e) the respondent shall also pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses to the petition.
(f) arrears of maintenance will be paid within three months from today.”
3 2004 SCC OnLine Del 192.
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 3 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
Court.
“ ISSUE No. I
11. This petition is under Section 127 Cr.P.C for alteration of maintenance amount which has been awarded to the petitioner and her son vide judgment Ex. PW1/3. Section 127 Cr.P.C read as under:-
Alteration in allowance.- [(I) On proof of a change in the circumstances of any person, receiving under section 125 a monthly allowance, for the maintenance or interim maintenance, or ordered under the same section to pay a monthly allowance for the maintenance, or interim maintenance, to his wife, child, father or mother, as the case may be, the Magistrate may make such alteration, as he thinks fit, in the allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance, as the case may be.]
(2) Where it appears to the Magistrate that, in consequence of any decision of a competent Civil Court, any order made under section 125 should be cancelled or varied, he shall cancel the order or, as the case may be, vary the same accordingly.
(3) Where any order has been made under section 125 in favour of a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband, the Magistrate shall, if he is satisfied that-
(a) the woman has, after the date of such divorce, re-married, cancel such order as from the date of her re-marriage;
(b) the woman has been divorced by her husband and that she has received, whether before or after the date of the said order, the whole of the sum which, under any customary or personal law applicable to the parties, was payable on such divorce, cancel such order-
(i) in the case where such sum was paid before such order, from the date on which such order was made;
(ii) in any other case, from the date of expiry of the period, if any, for which maintenance has been actually paid by the husband to the woman;
(c) the woman has obtained a divorce from her husband and that she had voluntarily surrendered her rights to [maintenance or interim maintenance as the case may be, j after her divorce, cancel the order from the date thereof
(4) At the time of making any decree for the recovery of any maintenance or dowry by any person, to whom a [monthly allowance for the maintenance and interim maintenance or any of them has
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 4 of 9
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
been ordered] to be paid under Section 125, the Civil Court shall take into account the sum which has been paid to, or recovered by, such person [as monthly allowance for the maintenance and interim maintenance or any of them, as the case may be, in pursuance of] the said order.
12. The facts which are admitted and not in dispute are as under:
13. Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate in her judgment Ex. PW 1 /3 observed in paragraph no. 12, relevant part of which is as under:
I am inclined to grant maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- per month to each of the petitioners ( totaling Rs. 6,000/- per month) from the date of filing the petition till they are legally entitled to receive the same.
14. The son of the parties namely Sanchit attained the age of majority on 20.03.2014. Petitioner claimed that he is physically weak and continuously under treatment and unable to maintain himself and she is maintaining him also. There is no such evidence on record that their son is incapable of maintaining him. Admittedly, he is not studying. In view of this, petitioner’s son is not entitled for maintenance, when he attained the age of majority in terms of judgment Ex. PW1/3. Thereafter, he is not entitled for any maintenance from the respondent.
15. In this case petitioner is seeking alteration in maintenance amount i.e enhancement of same claiming that there is substantial increase in the income of respondent after judgement Ex.PW1/3. It is pertinent to note that while passing judgment Ex. PW1/3, the monthly income of respondent was considered around Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 15,000/-. PW1 placed on record salary slip of the respondent for the month of August, 2019 which is not in dispute. The gross salary of respondent in August 2019 is Rs. 51,812/- and after deductions his net pay is Rs. 36,782/-. Hence, it is clear that there is a substantial increase in the income of the respondent from the date of passing of judgment Ex. PW1/3 till this petition has been filed. In view of this, petitioner has established
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 5 of 9
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
that there is change in circumstance for alteration in maintenance allowance awarded vide judgement Ex. PW1/3.
16. In this petition alteration of maintenance amount means enhancement of the same. Petitioner in her affidavit of income and assets, claimed that she is unemployed, however, her general monthly expenditure is Rs.23,500/-, out of which she is incurring a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per month towards maintenance of their son. Whereas respondent is doing a government job in MCD/PWD Department and getting more than Rs. 65,000/- per month. He has been residing in his own house.
17. Respondent in his affidavit of income and assets claimed that his monthly gross salary is Rs.51,812/-, though his net pay is Rs. 38,712/- out of which he is paying Rs. 6,000/- per month as maintenance to petitioner and also voluntarily provided Rs. 8,000/- per month for electricity, water, cable and for food and medicine.
18. Respondent admitted that he worked in Renatus an Ayurvedic company and was getting an amount in his Canara Bank Account, but there is no evidence when the respondent worked in the Renatus company and what amount he got in his account. Admittedly, he is working in MCD- a government body - where he is not permitted to do other work/additional work except his job.
19. It is pertinent that respondent placed on record his salary slip for the month of August, 2024 wherein his total salary is Rs. 81,360/- and after deductions, he is getting net monthly salary of Rs. 63,330/-. He is contributing Rs. 15,000/- per month towards GPF, which is not so excessive, seeing his overall deductions. In view of above, it is clear that in the year 2019, respondent’s net salary was Rs.36,782/- per month, whereas in August, 2024 his net monthly salary of Rs. 63,330/-.
20. One of the arguments of Ld. Counsel for the respondent is that respondent is maintaining three children of his late brother by paying approximately Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 8,000/- per month. Respondent testified that his brother and his wife have expired and he has liability for their three minor children. He has not disclosed whether the children are residing with him or not. It is pertinent that in his affidavit of income and assets, respondent has not shown the children of his late brother as his own dependent. Hence, respondent is not entitled for deduction of Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 8,000/- per month as his liability towards the children of his late brother.
ISSUE No. II/Relief
21. Now taking guidance from the judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Annurita Vohra Vs Sandeep Vohra 110 ( 2004 ) DLT 546, wherein it is held that:-
‘In my view, a satisfactory approach would be to divide the Family Resource Cake into two portions to the husband since he has to incur extra expenses in the course of making his earning,
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 6 of 9
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
and one share to each other member”
“22. In view of the above discussion, the following directions are issued in the present case :
(a) the respondent shall pay an amount of Rs.14,000/- per month to the petitioner as maintenance from the date of filing of the present petition i.e. 21.05.2019 till this month and thereafter, he shall continue to pay her the maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- per month.
(b) it is made clear that the monthly amount of Rs. 6,000 /- which she has received from respondent towards the maintenance shall be adjusted towards the enhanced maintenance awarded to her.
(c) petitioner shall get the aforesaid maintenance from the respondent during her lifetime or till she gets remarried after divorce or the law permits.
(d) any amount paid by the respondent as maintenance in any other proceedings for the period in question shall be liable to be adjusted in the maintenance amount awarded to the petition.
(e) the respondent shall also pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses to the petition.
(f) arrears of maintenance will be paid within three months from today. 23. This petition is accordingly disposed of.”
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 7 of 9
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
had attained the age of majority. Although the Petitioner claimed that her son is physically weak, undergoing medical treatment, and dependent on her for maintenance, the Court noted that she had failed to produce any evidence to substantiate his alleged incapacity to support himself. Furthermore, the Court took into account that the son was not pursuing any educational course. Accordingly, the Court rightly concluded that, having attained majority and in the absence of any evidence demonstrating his inability to maintain himself, the Petitioner’s son was not entitled to claim maintenance from the Respondent. The Petitioner also argued that the Family Court failed to consider the Respondent’s withdrawal of INR 16 lakhs from his GPF. However, such a withdrawal does not constitute additional income that would justify a proportionate increase in the maintenance awarded to the Petitioner.
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 8 of 9
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
SANJEEV NARULA, J
APRIL 22, 2025 d.negi
CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 178/2025 Page 9 of 9
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/04/2025 at 11:00:22
2 issues framed by the court
Was the Family Court's enhancement of maintenance from Rs.6,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per month adequate and lawful?
Should the respondent's GPF withdrawal and voluntary GPF contributions be considered in assessing his capacity to pay?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Annurita Vohra v. Sandeep VohraApplied¶7
2004 SCC OnLine Del 192 / 110 (2004) DLT 546 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Chanderwati
Lal Jee
Sanjeev Narula
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
