“The petitioner submitted that the Trial Court erred in allowing the petition even without filing the statement of assets and liabilities and the respondent herself deserted the petitioner and yet, sought maintenance, therefore, she is not entitled to claim any interim maintenance.”
In a recent legal pronouncement, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has affirmed the validity of a maintenance order, notwithstanding the wife’s failure to disclose her financial assets and liabilities. This judicial determination was rendered in response to a revision petition submitted under Article 227 of the Constitution, challenging a preceding order issued on October 17th, 2023.
Presiding Justice B.S. Bhanumathi underscored that the husband’s abstention from contesting the interim order during the Trial Court proceedings, premised on the wife’s omission of financial disclosure, precluded his assertion of its illegality.
Furthermore, the Court emphasized that the husband’s neglect to expressly contest his income in his counter-statements lent credence to the Trial Court’s assessment of his financial capacity for maintenance computation.
The genesis of the case lies in matrimonial discord between the petitioner-husband and respondent-wife, marked by allegations of dowry harassment and dereliction of duty regarding the medical expenses of their offspring. Despite these contentious issues, the Trial Court adjudicated in favor of granting interim maintenance to the wife.
In its legal analysis, the High Court found the husband’s allegation of spousal desertion lacking in substantive evidence to sustain the claim.
Consequently, the High Court dismissed the husband’s revision petition, thereby reaffirming the Trial Court’s maintenance order and stressing the necessity of punctual objections and explicit rebuttals in legal proceedings.