family court - The Legal Chamber

The Supreme Court enhanced the appellant-wife's permanent alimony to ₹50,000 per month with a 5% increase every two years, modifying the High Court's order. The Court held the previous alimony inadequate given the respondent-husband's income and the appellant's need to maintain her standard of living. Financial support for the 26-year-old son was not mandated. Facts Of The Case: Rakhi Sadhukhan (appellant-wife) and Raja Sadhukhan (respondent-husband) were married on June 18, 1997, and had a son on August 5, 1998. In July 2008, the respondent-husband filed Matrimonial Suit No. 430 of 2008 seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty. The appellant-wife then filed Misc. Case No. 155 of 2008 for interim maintenance, and the Trial Court awarded her ₹8,000 per month and ₹10,000 for litigation expens...

The Supreme Court ruled that requiring a non-custodial parent to file repeated applications for visitation rights imposes undue procedural burdens. It held that interim custody arrangements must balance a child's welfare with both parents' rights, emphasizing structured access schedules over case-by-case approvals. The judgment establishes that meaningful parent-child contact shouldn't be hindered by procedural formalities when consistent involvement is demonstrated, particularly in transnational custody cases. The Court directed family courts to implement standing visitation orders pending final custody determinations. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a custody dispute between Eby Cherian (appellant), an engineer working rotational overseas postings, and Jerema John (respondent), a ...

Tag: family court

Husband’s Income vs Wife’s Rights: Supreme Court’s Decision on Permanent Alimony”

Child Custody Battle : Supreme Court Eases Custody Rules for NRI Father