You’re educated... you should earn’: SC questionswoman’s demand for ₹12 cr alimony

 

You’re educated... you should earn’: SC questionswoman’s demand for ₹12 cr alimony, BMW car

CJI Gavai urges educated woman seeking ₹12 crore alimony to work instead, highlighting financial self-reliance in a brief Supreme Court hearing.

“You are so educated. You should not have to ask, you should earn for yourself,” Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai told a woman during a Supreme Court hearing on Tuesday, as the bench questioned her demand for a ₹12 crore alimony, a flat and a BMW car after a marriage that lasted just 18 months.

The woman justified the demand by stating that her estranged husband was “very rich,” and opposed his allegations that she was suffering from schizophrenia. (HT Photo)

Delivering the remark in Hindi: “Aap itni padhi-likhi hain. Aapko khudko maangna nahi chahiye, aur khud kama ke khana chahiye”, the CJI made a strong case for financial self-reliance among educated women, particularly professionals.

The woman in question, an MBA and a former banking professional, demanded a one-time settlement of ₹12 crore and a flat in the upscale Kalpataru complex in Mumbai, free of cost and encumbrances. She justified the demand by stating that her estranged husband was “very rich,” and opposed his allegations that she was suffering from schizophrenia. “Do I look schizophrenic, my lords?” She asked the bench, also comprising justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria, during the hearing.

The bench was hearing a matrimonial dispute between the woman and her husband, whose marriage lasted about a year and a half. The husband moved for annulment, citing concerns about the wife’s mental health , while she filed for maintenance. The proceedings eventually reached the top court after a prolonged legal battle.

The woman expressed concern that a contempt case initiated against her at the instance of her husband for not going ahead with the divorce proceedings might hinder her job prospects. Responding to this, the bench assured her that the court could quash the case as part of a broader settlement.

Representing the husband, senior advocate Madhavi Divan and SS Jauhar pushed back against the wife’s demands, calling them excessive. “She has to work also. Everything cannot be demanded like this,” Divan submitted. She added that the husband, though once highly paid —earning over ₹2.5 crore in 2015-16 along with a ₹1 crore bonus, was no longer at that income level. She further noted that the wife was already in possession of a flat with two parking spaces, which could serve as an asset or source of income. On the demand for the BMW, Divan clarified that the car in question was over a decade old and had already been scrapped.

The bench clarified that the woman could not claim ancestral property or assets belonging to her husband’s father. “Understand, you cannot claim the properties of his father also,” the court noted.

Before concluding the hearing, the court laid down a final proposal -- either the woman accepts a flat, free of all encumbrances, or takes ₹4 crore and seeks suitable employment. The quashing of the FIR was also included in the settlement package. “Either you get a flat free of all encumbrance or nothing…or you take the 4 crore and find a good job.”

The court has now reserved its order in the case.

The couple involved in the case got married in 2015. It was the second marriage for both of them. Soon after the marriage, troubles ensued and the woman lodged an FIR under the cruelty charge against the husband in Mumbai. The man’s petition in the Bombay High Court to get the FIR quashed was dismissed in November 2024, leading to the present proceedings before the Supreme Court.

The woman expressed concern that a contempt case initiated against her at the instance of her husband for not going ahead with the divorce proceedings might hinder her job prospects. Responding to this, the bench assured her that the court could quash the case as part of a broader settlement.

Representing the husband, senior advocate Madhavi Divan and SS Jauhar pushed back against the wife’s demands, calling them excessive. “She has to work also. Everything cannot be demanded like this,” Divan submitted. She added that the husband, though once highly paid —earning over ₹2.5 crore in 2015-16 along with a ₹1 crore bonus, was no longer at that income level. She further noted that the wife was already in possession of a flat with two parking spaces, which could serve as an asset or source of income. On the demand for the BMW, Divan clarified that the car in question was over a decade old and had already been scrapped.

he bench clarified that the woman could not claim ancestral property or assets belonging to her husband’s father. “Understand, you cannot claim  properties of his father also,” the court noted.

Before concluding the hearing, the court laid down a final proposal -- either the woman accepts a flat, free of all encumbrances, or takes ₹4 crore and seeks suitable employment. The quashing of the FIR was also included in the settlement package. “Either you get a flat free of all encumbrance or nothing…or you take the 4 crore and find a good job.”

The court has now reserved its order in the case.

The couple involved in the case got married in 2015. It was the second marriage for both of them. Soon after the marriage, troubles ensued and the woman lodged an FIR under the cruelty charge against the husband in Mumbai. The man’s petition in the Bombay High Court to get the FIR quashed was dismissed in November 2024, leading to the present proceedings before the Supreme Court.