Instead of money, man promises ghee and milk as alimony

Instead of money, man promises ghee and milk as alimony

In a rare judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has accepted the plea by the petitioner who said that he was unable to pay the monthly allowance to his wife as ordered by a family court. (Image for representation)

Matrimonial disputes before courts seeking alimony often end up in a monthly maintenance allowance to be paid to the spouse, depending upon the merits of the case.

However, a Haryana man fighting a matrimonial dispute against his estranged wife will provide pure ghee, daily wear suits, 2 litre of milk and other food grains as maintenance, instead of money.

In a rare judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has accepted the plea by the petitioner who said that he was unable to pay the monthly allowance to his wife as ordered by a family court.

Instead, he offered before the high court to provide monthly ration commodities and daily wear suits to his wife.

The Court based on the submission said, “The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that instead of making payment, the petitioner is ready to provide 20 kg of rice, 5 kg of sugar, 5 kg of different pulses, 15 kg of wheat and 5 kg of pure ghee every month, besides, three wearing suits quarterly and two litre of milk every day to the respondent.”    

Punjab and Haryana High Court advocate Mohit Garg told DH that section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) deals with the aspect of maintenance to the wife.

“The judgment is rare. Its execution though will remain the crucial factor. The whole idea is to see that the wife is able to take care of her life,” he said.  

The couple, which got married in 2007, suffered a estranged relationship which eventually led to the wife filing several cases against her husband and his family, including that of dowry and harassment.

A family court in Haryana’s Bhiwani ordered the man to pay a monthly maintenance allowance of Rs 5,000 to his wife.

In his petition, the man said that he was working with a private company and has been unemployed since 2016 after the company shut down.

He claimed that he did not have resources to look after his two children, elderly parents and himself. The division bench also asked the man to clear the pending maintenance dues which he had not paid to his wife.