Back
Earnings from share sale part of husband's income: enhances maintenance to ₹1.2 lakh
Justice Lalitha Kanneganti of the has delivered a significant ruling on maintenance, holding that income from the sale of shares must be factored into a husband's , even if such earnings are variable. The Court enhanced the monthly for a wife and her minor son from ₹50,000 to ₹1.2 lakh, while also granting for the period before the wife lost her job.
The Dispute: A Tale of Two Petitions
The case involved Elizabeth George (the wife) and Vivek George Jacob (the husband), who are parties in divorce proceedings under the . The wife had filed a petition under Section 38 of the Act seeking , while the husband challenged the quantum of maintenance awarded by the . Both parties approached the High Court with cross-petitions: the wife sought enhancement, and the husband sought reduction.
The trial court, on , had granted ₹50,000 per month as maintenance from —the month the wife lost her job due to organizational restructuring—and directed the husband to pay school fees directly. Dissatisfied, both parties appealed.
Arguments: Suppression vs. Sustainability
The husband's senior counsel argued that the wife, being qualified with a B.Tech and MBA, was capable of earning and not entitled to maintenance. He contended that the wife's claimed expenses of ₹1,75,438 per month were exaggerated, and after meeting his own expenses of ₹1,96,885 per month, he was left with only ₹50,363. He further argued that the value of stock options (₹28.42 lakh per annum) should not be considered part of his regular income as it varies month-to-month.
The wife's counsel countered that the husband had suppressed material facts. As per his income tax returns, his gross total income was ₹90.84 lakh, including perquisites and stock sale proceeds. The wife had been diagnosed with glaucoma and an autoimmune disease, rendering her unable to work. She argued that the trial court failed to consider her medical needs and the ₹47,106 EMI she was paying for car and personal loans.
Legal Analysis: Stock Options Count as Income
The High Court rejected the husband's contention that stock sale proceeds should be excluded. Referring to the 's decision in and the 's judgment in , the Court held that from shares is part of the husband's and cannot be overlooked.
The Court noted that the husband had been receiving ₹20–28 lakh annually from selling shares.
"Every year he is getting an amount of Rs. 20 to 28 lakhs by selling the shares and it is part of the husband's income, though he may not be getting it every month. That has to be considered as his income,"
the Court observed.
Additionally, the Court criticized the trial court for failing to consider the wife's medical condition and her financial obligations, including the EMI payments.
"The trial court has failed to consider all these aspects, and granted the maintenance from the date of petition,"
the Court said.
Key Observations
-
"Even respondent cannot deny the fact that, in her medical condition, she is not in a position to work."
-
"The wife had stated that the expenses are Rs.1,75,438/- per month. In that, the major component is the EMI she is paying towards the car loan and the personal loan, that is Rs.47,106/-."
-
"If the court had granted Rs.50,000/- after she lost the job, some reasonable amount ought to have been granted from the date of application."
The Decision: Maintenance Enhanced, Husband's Petition Dismissed
The High Court allowed the wife's petition (W.P. No. 5358/2026) and dismissed the husband's petition (W.P. No. 4253/2026). The maintenance was enhanced from ₹50,000 to ₹1.2 lakh per month, payable from the date of the trial court's order. Additionally, the wife was awarded ₹30,000 per month from the date of filing the application () until , when she lost her job. The husband was directed to pay within four weeks and to continue bearing the child's educational expenses, including reimbursement for the .
The Court also left the parties liberty to seek modification if circumstances change. This ruling reinforces the principle that all sources of income, including variable capital gains, must be disclosed and considered in maintenance proceedings.
