Ex-Wife can Recover Maintenance from Deceased Husband's Estate, But Can't Seek Increase in Amount: HC

A former wife can recover unpaid maintenance from her deceased husband's estate, but can not demand increase in the amount as allowing it would "open the floodgates to litigation", the Bombay High Court has said.

To determine a fair enhancement in maintenance, the court "must balance the wife's requirements with the husband's actual capability", and when the husband is dead, this vital side of the judicial equation is missing, said a division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande in the ruling passed in May.

The bench was hearing an appeal filed by 62-year-old Warsha, widow of Naren Goregaonkar, against a family court's order.

As per the plea, the couple got married in January 1974 but got separated in 1977 without any children. Naren filed a petition seeking divorce in 1980. It was granted, and he was directed to pay Warsha Rs 6,000 per month.

Following Naren's death in March 2012, Warsha approached the Family Court seeking recovery of accumulated maintenance arrears and also sought an increase in the amount to cope with the rising cost of living and medical expenses.

In February 2023, the family court allowed her to recover the arrears from Naren's estate, but rejected her plea for enhanced maintenance, hence she moved the high Court.

Goregaonkar's legal heirs, represented by advocate Pradeep Chavan, argued that the maintenance arrears can be recovered from his estate, but the woman can not seek enhancement of the amount.

The HC noted that a maintenance decree binds "the estate/heirs for arrears satisfaction, unlike pending matrimonial proceedings that abate on death".

"A finalised decree of maintenance is treated like any civil decree which is enforceable post death and the death of the husband would not at all affect a decree of maintenance...," the bench said.

But allowing enhancement of maintenance "would result in absurdity, uncertainty and would open the floodgates to litigation", the high court said.

"Apart, if the enhancement is based on the notional growth of the estate in the hands of the legal heirs, the enhancement would treat them unfairly, if the growth of the estate is purely attributable to their own doings," the bench said.

It would amount to creation of a share in the estate for the ex-wife who is not at all responsible for its growth, the court said.

"Had it been the case that her husband had substantially progressed and created wealth or estate during his lifetime, definitely, she would have been entitled to claim a share, but the legal heirs are not bound to share their financial growth with the widow," the court held, dismissing the appeal.