Justice Dr Shalini Phansalkar Joshi rejected the plea filed by the estranged husband against an order directing him to pay Rs 30,000 per month to the woman.
In a significant order, the Bombay High court, while rejecting a challenge to the grant of interim maintenance to a woman by her estranged husband, noted that 'professional potentiality' and 'ability to earn' of a man needs to be taken into account while deciding the claim. The estranged husband was out of a job when maintenance was granted by a family court, and hence, he had challenged the order in the High Court.
Justice Dr Shalini Phansalkar Joshi rejected the plea filed by the estranged husband against an order directing him to pay Rs 30,000 per month to the woman.
It said, "In the instant case, if one has regard to the rich experience the petitioner is having in his job, his potentiality, his present status as Member of John Maxwell Team (a group of certified coaches, trainers, speakers, mentors, and professionals), then it follows that at present also he must be earning substantial sum."
It added, "Whereas wife is not having any source of income and now she also cannot support herself when the job is left long back for the purpose of household duties. Hence, merely because at one time in her life, about 20 years back, she was doing some job, she cannot be denied her lawful claim."
The couple both 50-years-old has two adult children. The wife had last year moved a petition seeking a divorce, in which she also sought maintenance. The family court, after going through the records, allowed her application. This order was challenged in the HC by the estranged husband.
It was argued by him that, "At the time of deciding the application, husband had no source of income, merely on basis of his earning capacity and potentiality, cannot be legal and correct, especially when in this case, the services of the husband were terminated on account of his unsatisfactory performance, thereby indicating that he is no more having the potential or earning capacity. Further, while deciding the application in favour of the wife, her earning capacity should also have been considered."
However, the court rejected the argument based on professional details posted on a social media website by the estranged husband, which stated that he had worked for last 30 years in the corporate world, having huge and satisfying experience in the area of business development; out of which he has spent 26 years in leadership roles, managing businesses independently and through highly motivated and productive teams. It also said he was working with two clients.
The court said, "Thus, it is apparent that the petitioner has not lost his earning capacity or potential but he has gained it with three decades of experience and exploiting it fully for the purpose of having the better financial prospects."
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Bombay High Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}