Ahmedabad: A husband’s loan repayments cannot dilute his primary legal duty to support his family, the Gujarat high court has ruled while enhancing maintenance for a woman and her daughter. The court increased the monthly amount significantly after reviewing the man’s income and obligations. The case stems from a May 2025 order of a family court in Surendranagar, which had directed the man to pay Rs 12,000 per month to his estranged wife and Rs 6,000 to their daughter. The woman challenged the order, seeking a higher amount. She told the court that her husband earns a net monthly salary of Rs 79,238 and also makes around Rs 35,000 through share trading. She further argued that he had not fully disclosed his assets and financial position.The husband opposed the plea, stating that he had loan liabilities and also needed to support his retired father. He claimed that his wife had left the matrimonial home on her own and that there was no desertion on his part.After examining the records and hearing both sides, the HC noted that the family court had accepted the woman’s claim that she was not given household expenses and had faced mental and physical harassment. The court also observed that the woman had expressed willingness to return during her deposition, but the husband made no effort to bring her back.Citing Supreme Court rulings, Justice Gita Gopi said maintenance must be fair, realistic and in line with the financial status of the parties. The court made it clear that deductions for loan repayments, especially those related to asset creation, cannot be used to reduce maintenance liability. “Any deduction of loan amount cannot be given countenance since the said deduction is to be considered as voluntary and it pertains to acquisition of assets which cannot be permitted to dilute the primary duty of the applicant to maintain his wife and child.“Taking the man’s payslip into account, the court noted that he was responsible for supporting three dependents besides himself. It ruled that the income should be shared equally among all four, and ordered him to pay Rs 19,800 per month each to his wife and daughter.
