Supreme Court: Alimony Can’t Equalize Wealth; ₹12 Crore Granted Instead of ₹500 Crore Demand in 4-Month Marriage

Landmark verdict addresses rising trend of exorbitant alimony demands in divorce cases.

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that alimony should not be used as a tool to equalize wealth between divorced spouses. This comes after a petitioner demanded ₹500 crore in alimony from her ex-husband, a US citizen with an estimated ₹5000 crore in assets, despite their marriage lasting only 3-4 months. The apex court instead awarded her ₹12 crore, citing principles of fairness and proportionality.

A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice NK Singh expressed concerns over the increasing tendency to equate alimony with a spouse’s rising wealth post-divorce. They stated:

• The wife is entitled to maintain a lifestyle similar to what she had during her marriage but cannot demand perpetual adjustments based on her ex-husband’s improving financial status.

• Alimony laws aim to ensure dignity and social justice for destitute spouses, not serve as punitive or extortionate mechanisms.

Key Points of the Verdict

• The court highlighted the double standards in alimony demands, where women often seek increased maintenance if their ex-husbands become wealthier but rarely agree to reductions if their wealth declines.

• The law obligates a husband to provide reasonable maintenance reflecting the wife’s standard of living during the marriage, but not beyond that in perpetuity.

• The bench criticized the misuse of domestic violence and maintenance laws, emphasizing their intent as protective measures rather than tools for financial leverage.

Case Background

The petitioner claimed ₹500 crore, citing her ex-husband’s wealth and the ₹500 crore alimony he paid to his first wife after their divorce. However, the court noted significant differences, including the length of the marriages (4 months versus years) and the circumstances of separation.

Verdict and Implications

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant ₹12 crore instead of the ₹500 crore demanded underscores the principle that alimony should reflect fairness and proportionality rather than act as a means for wealth equalization. This landmark ruling is expected to shape future matrimonial cases and curb the trend of inflated alimony demands.

This judgment reinforces the core purpose of maintenance laws—to ensure support and dignity for those in genuine need, without penalizing the other party’s success post-divorce.