The term support ‟ is not to be construed in a narrow manner so as to mean bare subsistence. It covers such maintenance so as to live in a similar status as was enjoyed by the spouse in their matrimonial home., held the Delhi high Court while awarding maintenance to a husband

In the case Rani Sethi vs Sunil Sethi, the trial court had ordered the wife to pay maintenance to the husband which was challenged by the wife.

The claim by the wife was that the court has erred in considering the fact that she had to maintain her two children. Further on the perusal of records it was found that the husband was thrown out the house and hi partnership in which he was engaged has dissolved miserably.

The court relied on the apex courts judgement of Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v District Judge Dehradun and other where it was held that the Court has to ascertain the status of the parties,their needs and capacity to maintain the other.Reliance was also sought on the case of Bharat Hegde v Saroj Hegde in order to determine the interim maintenance.

The Court held that It means that the other spouse, who has no independent source of income, is provided with such maintenance so as to live in a similar status as was enjoyed by them in their matrimonial home. It is the purpose of section 24 that the wife or the husband who has no sufficient source of income for her or his support or for the expenses of the proceedings must be provided with such reasonable sum that strikes equity between the spouses, the court held while upholding order of maintenance to the husband.

Click here to view judgement