Summary
- The Delhi High Court has clarified that a retirement corpus cannot be treated as monthly income for maintenance in matrimonial disputes.
- The court emphasized the distinction between accumulated capital and the income generated from it, stating only recurring returns should be considered as income.
- This ruling arose from an appeal by Meenakshi Batra against a Family Court order denying her maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
- The implications of this decision could reshape how financial resources are assessed in similar cases, impacting future maintenance claims.
Join the discussion ā sign up to comment, upvote, and save articles.