The Allahabad High Court has upheld an increase in monthly maintenance from ₹9,000 to ₹18,000 after finding that a retired judicial officer failed to disclose his pension income fully in litigation with his wife.
The court treated the omission as especially serious because the husband had served in the judiciary and understood the duty of candor owed to a court. It rejected the suggestion that obligations to a second household could, by themselves, reduce the support payable to the first wife.
The judgment also found that the purported divorce had been granted by a court lacking the required jurisdiction. Because the decree came from a Civil Judge, Senior Division, rather than the competent District Judge, the High Court held that it could not produce a valid dissolution of the marriage.
The ruling joins two procedural points that often decide maintenance disputes. A court can only assess capacity fairly when income is disclosed, and a change in marital status cannot be assumed from an order made without jurisdiction. The decision does not treat maintenance as punishment; it restores the assessment to the financial position that should have been placed before the family court from the beginning.
