A district court on Friday ordered a 43-year-old man with two wives to pay more maintenance to his second wife whom he subjected to domestic violence, saying in its order that since he can easily afford to have two wives, it follows that he is well capable of maintaining them both with the dignity and the level desired.
Resisting paying more maintenance, the husband told the court that he had to provide for his first wife and their two children and that he was responsible for his parents. Additional Sessions Judge UM Padwad said: âIt should be noted that Respondent # 2 (husband) has another wife and two children from her. Since he can easily afford to have two wives, it follows that he is quite capable of wives with the dignity and level desired. ”
The victim went to court to obtain better financial compensation from the Mazgaon court of first instance. She had filed a claim for redress under the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act and ordered a monthly maintenance of just Rs. 3,000. The Sessions Court slightly improved the maintenance to Rs. 5,000 instead. . The court felt while increasing the assertion that it is a common experience that the cost of living in Mumbai is very high. He said that it would be difficult for the woman to meet even her basic needs with the cash relief of Rs. 3,000.
The husband had told the court that he was a laborer earning Rs. 9,000 a month. Judge Padwad called it a “calculated” and “opportunistic” defense because he did not provide any other details, including the nature of the work. On the other hand, the wife had claimed that he was acting as a money lender but could not produce any evidence in this regard.
The Mazgaon court had only ordered Rs. 3,000 in maintenance as there was not sufficient material to show the man’s exact income. Judge Padwad said that it is always up to the husband to state his precise income as it can never be within the reach of the wife to collect documents. The woman is not expected to suffer from any fault on her part simply because she could not produce documents proving her exact income. The court added that the husband avoided providing income details and is in a better position for a meager amount, and then ordered the monetary relief to be increased.
(To receive our E-paper on WhatsApp daily, please Click here. We allow sharing of the PDF of the article on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)
Posted on: Monday October 25, 2021 6:34 am IST