Haseena v. Iqbal

O R D E R %

12.11.2025

¶1By the present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 24.10.2024 (hereafter 'impugned order'), passed by the learned Family Court in MT No.320/2021, thereby granting an interim maintenance of ₹7,000/- per month to the petitioner. The petitioner seeks enhancement of the interim maintenance stating that the respondent has been earning much more.

¶2The learned Family Court took note of the affidavits of Assets, Income and Expenditure filed by the petitioner as well as the respondent. Even though the respondent has shown his income to be Nil, the learned Family Court rightly noted that none of the parties have placed on record any proof regarding each other's income as alleged by them.

¶3In view of the fact that none of the parties had been able to produce any evidence in regard to their incomes, the learned Family Court directed the respondent to pay a sum of ₹7,000/- as interim maintenance.

¶4I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court.

¶5Undisputedly, the impugned order relates to interim maintenance, which is based on the prima facie assessment of This is a digitally signed order. material available with the learned Family Court.

¶6It is also common knowledge that the parties embroiled in matrimonial disputes, do not disclose their incomes truly and in such circumstances, the Courts are at liberty to take reasonable assessment of the situation and pass an order.

¶7Despite being an able-bodied man, the respondent stated that he is not earning any money and, therefore, the reasonable assessment of his income can be made on the basis of minimum wages as applicable in the city and an order of interim maintenance can be passed considering the same to be his (the husband's) income.

¶8Undisputedly, the respondent is an able-bodied man and therefore, can be presumed to be earning at least the minimum wages as applicable in the city, which is, ₹18,000/- to ₹20,000/- per month. An interim maintenance of ₹7,000/- per month fixed by the learned Family Court, is therefore, a reasonable amount.

¶9Undisputedly, the matter is pending before the learned Family Court and the parties would be at liberty to lead evidences in support of their contentions pursuant to which, a final order would be passed.

¶10However, at this stage, in the absence of any cogent evidence, interim maintenance of ₹7,000/- is a reasonable amount.

¶11I, therefore, find no reason to reason to interfere with the impugned order.

¶12The present petition is, therefore, dismissed. AMIT MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 12, 2025 / 'KDK' This is a digitally signed order.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P.(MAT.) 62/2025 HASEENA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv. versus IQBAL .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN