1. Maintenance claim under Section 125 CrPC — Family Court order for maintenance — High Court reversal based on income tax returns — Appeal against reversal. (Para 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1690
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Hima Kohli, JJ.
Kiran Tomar & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1865 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP(Crl) No 8768 of 2022)
Decided On : 31-10-2022
Important Points
The assessment of income for maintenance purposes should be based on a holistic assessment of evidence, considering the needs of the dependents.
Subject
Family Law - Maintenance
Act Referred
Headnote
Maintenance - Family Court - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 125 - Guardians and Wards Act 1890 - [SUMMARY OF ACT SECTIONS REFERENCED AND DISCUSSED]
Fact of the Case:
The Family Court directed the second respondent to pay maintenance to the appellants. The High Court set aside the judgment of the Family Court due to discrepancies in the assessment of the second respondent's income.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court's judgment did not reflect a correct appreciation of the reasons which weighed with the Family Court. The Family Court's findings were based on the second respondent's averments and failure to disclose income.
Issues: Discrepancies in the assessment of the second respondent's income and the Family Court's findings.
Ratio Decidendi: The Family Court's assessment of the second respondent's income should be based on a holistic assessment of evidence, considering the needs of the appellants.
Final Decision: The High Court's order was set aside, and the Criminal Revision was restored to the file of the High Court for consideration afresh. The second respondent was directed to pay the arrears of maintenance, and the Criminal Revision would be dismissed if he failed to comply.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Nagendra Singh, Advocate, Ms. Akansha, Advocate, Mr Ashish Pandey, Advocate, Mr Sanjay Gupta, Advocate, Mr Prateek Rai, Advocate, Mr. Akash Choudhary, Advocate, Dr. Sushil Balwada, Advocate, For the Appellant / Ms. Priya Hingorani, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sunny Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate, Ms. Monika Rai, Advocate, Mr. Sarvesh Singh Baghel, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Nagendra Singh, Advocate, Ms. Akansha, Advocate, Mr Ashish Pandey, Advocate, Mr Sanjay Gupta, Advocate, Mr Prateek Rai, Advocate, Mr. Akash Choudhary, Advocate, Dr. Sushil Balwada, Advocate, For the Appellant / Ms. Priya Hingorani, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sunny Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate, Ms. Monika Rai, Advocate, Mr. Sarvesh Singh Baghel, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Table of Contents
2. Dispute over the accuracy of income tax returns as a measure of real income and the evidentiary basis for the Family Court's income assessment. (Para 4 , 9 )
3. The High Court failed to appreciate the Family Court's holistic assessment of evidence regarding concealed income and the limitations of income tax returns in matrimonial disputes. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 )
4. Income tax returns are not necessarily accurate guides of real income in matrimonial conflicts; real income must be determined through a holistic assessment of evidence. (Para 10 )
5. High Court order set aside — Criminal Revision restored to High Court conditional upon payment of maintenance arrears. (Para 12 , 16 , 18 )
6. Are income tax returns considered an accurate guide for determining real income in matrimonial maintenance disputes?
No, income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of real income, as parties in matrimonial conflicts often underestimate income. The court must determine real income through a holistic assessment of evidence to ensure the dependents live in conditions commensurate with their accustomed status. (Para 10 )
7. What is the court's approach when a revisional court sets aside a finding based on a narrow interpretation of evidence?
The revisional court must operate within the parameters of revisional jurisdiction and consider the holistic reasoning of the lower court rather than focusing on a single piece of evidence to overturn findings of fact. (Para 9 , 11 )
8. Can the restoration of a revisional petition be made conditional upon the payment of maintenance arrears?
Yes, the court may set aside a lower court's order and restore a revision to the High Court on the condition that the party complies with directions to pay outstanding maintenance arrears. (Para 12 , 15 , 16 )
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal arises from a judgment of a Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 10 August 2022 in Criminal Revision No 1670 of 2022.
3. The Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court at District Gautambudh Nagar, by an order dated 11 March 2022, allowed Miscellaneous Case No 197 of 2016 instituted by the appellants under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and directed the second respondent to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs 20,000 per month to the first appellant and Rs 15,000 each to the second and third appellants, who are daughters of the first appellant and the second respondent.
4. While setting aside the judgment of the Family Court, the High Court has encapsulated its entire reasoning in one paragraph, which is extracted below:
'Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. Perusal of the impugned Judgement and order shows that the learned Family Court has recorded the findings that the revisionist is earning Rs. 2 lacs per month, on the other hand, the Income Tax Return (I.T.R.) filed by the revisionist shows that he is earning Rs. 4.5 lacs per annum. Furthermore, this Court failed to appreciate that on what basis the learned Family Court has recorded the findings that the income of revisionist is Rs. 2 lacs per month, when there is nothing on record to demonstrate the same.'
5. We have heard Mr Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Ms Priya Hingorani, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent.
6. The judgment of the High Court does not reflect a correct appreciation of the reasons which weighed with the Family Court. The Family Court, inter alia, noted that:
(i) In the proceedings which he instituted under the Guardians and Wards Act 1890, the second respondent specifically averred that he is 'a respectable member of his family and has good resources';
(ii) It is an admitted position that the second respondent works as a contractor;
(iii) While the second respondent claimed in the above proceeding that the first appellant was unable to maintain the minor children, he had filed documentary evidence about his educational qualifications for demonstrating his capability to raise the children;
(iv) Though the second respondent is in business with his father, he failed to disclose his income in the property statement; and
(v) The second respondent admitted that he has a rental house whose rent is paid by his father.
7. On the above premises, the Family Court came to the conclusion that the second respondent had concealed the income which he earns in the business which he carries on together with his father from the court.
8. The Family Court has also dealt with the statement of the first appellant that she was a partner in a company (stated to belong to her brother) and had an amount of Rs 12,000 in the bank account. The Family Court observed that the first appellant is not working on a post in the company and, as a matter of fact, her expenses including on the children is borne by her parents, brother and sister. In this backdrop, the Family Court issued directions for the payment of maintenance in its order dated 11 March 2022.
9. The High Court ought to have been aware of the parameters of the revisional jurisdiction. The extract from the judgment which has been set out above indicates that the High Court was of the view that:
(i) Whereas the first appellant stated that the second respondent earns an amount of Rs Two Lakhs per month, his income tax return indicates that the second respondent is earning Rs 4.5 Lakhs per annum; and
(ii) The Family Court had not indicated the basis on which it had assessed the income of the second respondent at Rs Two Lakhs per month.
10. On the first aspect, it is well-settled that income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of the real income. Particularly, when parties are engaged in a matrimonial conflict, there is a tendenc
