Whether maintenance is claimed under Section 144 BNSS (formerly Section 125 CrPC), Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, or Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the statutes state the destination but not the arithmetic. How, then, does a court arrive at a monthly figure? This explainer sets out the guiding standard, the factors courts weigh, and the disclosure regime that supplies the raw material.
The guiding standard
The consistent thread running through Section 144 BNSS, Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section 20 of the DV Act is this: the claimant spouse should be able to live with reasonably the same degree of comfort and dignity as she enjoyed in the matrimonial home. Maintenance is not a subsistence dole that keeps the wife just above destitution; equally, it is not a windfall or a penalty designed to strip the paying spouse. The figure must be reasonable and realistic on both sides — sufficient for the claimant and children to live decently by the standard of the marriage, while leaving the payer able to maintain himself and discharge his own legitimate obligations.
The factors courts weigh
No single factor controls. Courts assess the whole financial picture of both households, and in Delhi the exercise typically covers the following:
- Income of both parties — salary, business income, rental income, interest and other returns, taken net of tax and statutory deductions, with the earning capacity of each side considered alongside declared income.
- Qualifications and actual earning of the wife — the distinction is between capacity to earn and actual earning; the reasons a qualified spouse is not working, including child care and years away from the workforce, are weighed rather than assumed away.
- Reasonable needs of the claimant and children — residence, food, clothing, education and school-related expenses, medical needs, conveyance and a reasonable margin for the ordinary incidents of life.
- Standard of living during the marriage — the benchmark against which "reasonable needs" are measured, gathered from the residence occupied, schooling of children, vehicles, travel and general lifestyle.
- Dependants and liabilities of the payer — parents or others genuinely dependent on the paying spouse, and liabilities such as EMIs, weighed with care: obligations voluntarily incurred to depress disposable income are viewed sceptically, while genuine pre-existing liabilities are accommodated.
- Age and health of the parties — medical conditions that increase needs or reduce earning capacity on either side.
- Conduct where the statute makes it relevant — for instance, the disentitling circumstances written into Section 144(4) BNSS; beyond such statutory relevance, maintenance is not an inquiry into matrimonial fault.
The affidavit of assets and liabilities
The raw material for this exercise comes from the affidavit of assets and liabilities that both parties are now required to file in maintenance cases. In a prescribed format, each side discloses income from every source, movable and immovable assets, bank accounts, investments, monthly expenditure, dependants, loans and EMIs, and supporting documents such as salary slips and income tax returns. The affidavit serves three purposes: it substitutes verified disclosure for rival guesswork, it lets the court fix a realistic interim figure early without a mini-trial, and it pins each party to a sworn statement that can be tested against documents later. A false or evasive affidavit invites consequences — the disclosure is on oath, and the court may act on the contradiction between the affidavit and the record.
Concealed income and adverse inference
Maintenance litigation routinely features a paying spouse whose declared income shrinks dramatically once proceedings begin — the businessman whose enterprise suddenly runs at a loss, the professional who reports a nominal figure. Courts are not bound by the declared figure. Where the disclosed income does not square with the visible standard of living — the residence, vehicles, club memberships, foreign travel, school fees paid, credit card and bank statements, or the pattern in income tax returns over the years — the court may draw an adverse inference against the non-disclosing party and impute an income consistent with the material on record. A notional income can likewise be attributed to an able-bodied spouse who chooses idleness to defeat the claim. In short, the assessment is of real means, not paper means.
Percentage of income: a cross-check, not a rule
Practitioners often speak of a share of the net income of the payer as a benchmark for the wife, with adjustments where children are also to be maintained. It is more accurate to treat any such fraction as a rough cross-check on the reasonableness of a figure reached through the factor-based exercise above. No statute prescribes a percentage, and a mechanical fraction can misfire at both ends of the income scale — too little where income is modest, more than needs justify where income is very large. The final figure must answer the needs-and-standard inquiry, with the fraction serving only as a sanity check.
Date from which maintenance runs
As a general working rule, maintenance is made payable from the date of the application. Litigation takes time, and a claimant who was in need on the day she approached the court should not be worse off because the decision came later. The court retains discretion to choose a different date for reasons recorded, and arrears computed from the application date are ordinarily directed to be cleared in reasonable instalments alongside the current monthly payment.
Multiple orders under different statutes
Because maintenance can be claimed in parallel under the BNSS, the Hindu Marriage Act and the DV Act, courts fixing quantum in a later proceeding take into account what has already been awarded in an earlier one, and adjust so that the payments operate as a set-off rather than a cumulation. The mechanics of this overlap are covered in a separate explainer on this website.
This article describes the general statutory framework for fixing quantum. Interim maintenance, enforcement of orders, alteration of orders on changed circumstances, and the maintenance of parents are addressed in separate explainers.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a fixed percentage of salary that must be paid as maintenance?
No statute fixes a percentage. Courts sometimes use a share of the net income of the paying spouse as a rough cross-check — the figure must leave the payer able to maintain himself and other dependants — but the operative exercise remains a fact-specific assessment of income, needs and standard of living, not a mechanical formula.
Does a qualified wife who is not working get maintenance?
Qualification alone does not disentitle a wife. Courts distinguish between capacity to earn and actual earning, and ask why a qualified spouse is not employed — child care responsibilities, a long gap from the workforce, or lack of opportunity are considered. At the same time, an able spouse is not encouraged to remain idle, and a notional income may be attributed in appropriate cases.
What if the husband claims he has no income?
Bare denial rarely succeeds. Both parties must file an affidavit of assets and liabilities, and the court can look at lifestyle, bank statements, income tax returns, property, loans serviced and expenditure to assess real earning capacity. Where concealment appears, the court may draw an adverse inference and impute an income consistent with the material on record.
From which date is maintenance payable?
Ordinarily, maintenance is awarded from the date of the application, so that the claimant is not prejudiced by the time litigation takes. The court retains discretion on the date in the circumstances of each case, and arrears are usually directed to be paid in instalments alongside the current monthly amount.