Interim Maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 allows either the wife or the husband to seek maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings during the pendency of matrimonial litigation. The provision is gender-neutral. The court may grant interim maintenance where the applicant has no independent income sufficient for their support and for necessary litigation expenses. The court considers income, assets, liabilities, lifestyle, dependants, children’s expenses, earning capacity and financial disclosures. The Supreme Court’s judgment in Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324, makes financial disclosure through an affidavit of assets and liabilities central to maintenance proceedings.

Interim Maintenance under Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act

1. Introduction

Interim maintenance is one of the most contested issues in matrimonial litigation. In many divorce, restitution, judicial separation and annulment proceedings, one spouse may have greater financial control while the other may be economically dependent, unemployed, under-employed, or burdened with childcare responsibilities.

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 exists to address this imbalance during litigation. It is not intended to punish one spouse or enrich the other. It is meant to ensure that matrimonial proceedings are not fought on unequal financial footing.

The legal idea is simple: a spouse should not be forced to abandon litigation merely because they cannot afford day-to-day support or litigation expenses.

2. What Does Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act Say?

Section 24 provides that where, in any proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act, it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband has no independent income sufficient for their support and necessary expenses of the proceeding, the court may order the respondent to pay litigation expenses and monthly maintenance during the proceeding. The proviso states that the application for payment of expenses and monthly sum should, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the opposite party.

This statutory wording is important for three reasons:

It applies to either spouse.
It applies during proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act.
It covers both monthly support and litigation expenses.

3. Meaning of Maintenance Pendente Lite

“Pendente lite” means “pending litigation”. Maintenance pendente lite is therefore interim financial support granted during the pendency of matrimonial proceedings.

It is different from permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Section 24 is temporary and litigation-linked. Section 25 deals with permanent alimony and maintenance at the time of passing any decree or subsequent thereto.

In practical terms, Section 24 may cover:

Monthly personal maintenance;
Rent or residential support;
Food, clothing and daily expenses;
Litigation expenses;
Advocate’s fee, where reasonable;
Travel expenses for attending court;
Child-related expenses, where connected to matrimonial proceedings;
Interim financial protection until the case is finally decided.

4. Is Section 24 Gender-Neutral?

Yes. Section 24 is gender-neutral. It expressly uses the phrase “either the wife or the husband”. Therefore, a husband may also claim interim maintenance if he satisfies the statutory test of insufficient independent income.

However, in practice, most applications are filed by wives because matrimonial financial dependency still commonly affects women more severely, especially where there has been career interruption, childcare responsibility, non-employment during marriage, or economic control by the other spouse.

The legal test remains the same: insufficient independent income and need for support during litigation.

5. Who Can File an Application under Section 24 HMA?

A Section 24 application may be filed by either spouse in a proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act, including proceedings for:

Divorce;
Judicial separation;
Restitution of conjugal rights;
Nullity of marriage;
Annulment;
Other matrimonial reliefs under the Act.

The application is ordinarily filed before the same Family Court or matrimonial court where the main HMA petition is pending.

6. Conditions for Grant of Interim Maintenance

The applicant must generally show:

There is a pending proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The applicant has no independent income sufficient for support.
The applicant requires litigation expenses.
The respondent has the means or capacity to pay.
The claim is supported by financial disclosure and documents.
There is no concealment of material income or assets by the applicant.

The court does not grant maintenance mechanically. It conducts a financial and equitable inquiry.

7. Rajnesh v. Neha: Why It Matters in Section 24 Cases

The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha recognised systemic problems in maintenance litigation, including delay, overlapping proceedings, non-disclosure of income and inconsistent orders. The Court directed parties in maintenance proceedings to file disclosure affidavits of assets and liabilities so that courts can determine maintenance fairly.

Although the case arose from Section 125 CrPC proceedings, the guidelines were framed broadly for maintenance proceedings before Family Courts, District Courts and Magistrate Courts. This makes the judgment highly relevant to Section 24 HMA applications.

After Rajnesh v. Neha, a Section 24 application should not be drafted casually. It should be supported by a proper affidavit of assets and liabilities and relevant financial documents.

8. Factors Considered by Courts While Deciding Section 24 Maintenance

There is no rigid mathematical formula. The court generally considers:

Income of both parties.
Assets and investments.
Bank accounts and financial transactions.
Standard of living during marriage.
Reasonable needs of the applicant.
Liabilities of the respondent.
Dependants of both parties.
School and medical expenses of children.
Age and health of the parties.
Earning capacity and employability.
Whether unemployment is genuine or deliberate.
Existing maintenance orders in other proceedings.
Conduct relating to financial disclosure.
Litigation expenses already incurred and likely to be incurred.

The object is not to create luxury. The object is to ensure fair support and effective participation in litigation.

9. Litigation Expenses under Section 24

Section 24 expressly permits the court to grant expenses of proceedings. This is a critical relief.

Litigation expenses may include:

Advocate’s professional fee;
Court fee and process fee;
Typing, filing and documentation charges;
Travel expenses;
Expenses for obtaining certified copies;
Expenses for financial records or necessary documentation;
Other reasonable case-related expenditure.

A strong application should separately plead monthly maintenance and litigation expenses. Mixing both into one vague prayer weakens the application.

10. Is Maintenance under Section 24 Automatic?

No. Section 24 maintenance is not automatic.

The applicant must demonstrate insufficient independent income. The respondent may contest the claim by showing that the applicant has income, assets, employment, rental income, business interest, investments or earning capacity.

At the same time, the respondent cannot avoid liability by merely claiming low income. Courts may examine lifestyle, bank transactions, business control, assets, social media indications, travel, property ownership and actual spending patterns.

The real question is not what a party says they earn. The real question is what the financial record shows.

11. Educated or Qualified Spouse: Can Maintenance Be Denied?

Maintenance cannot be denied solely because the applicant is educated. Courts examine whether the applicant is actually earning, whether the applicant has sufficient independent income, whether there was a career break, whether childcare responsibilities exist, and whether employment is reasonably available.

A highly qualified person who is deliberately avoiding work without justification may face a stronger challenge. But education alone is not income. A degree does not pay rent. The inquiry must remain factual.

12. Overlapping Maintenance Orders

A spouse may have maintenance proceedings under different statutes, such as the Hindu Marriage Act, Domestic Violence Act, CrPC/BNSS framework or personal law. The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha clarified that multiple remedies may be available, but double recovery must be avoided. Parties must disclose previous maintenance proceedings and orders, and courts should grant appropriate adjustment or set-off.

This is important in Section 24 applications. If maintenance has already been awarded in another proceeding, that fact must be disclosed. Concealment can seriously damage credibility.

13. Section 24 and Void Marriages: Recent Supreme Court Position

A significant development came in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur, decided by the Supreme Court on 12 February 2025. The Supreme Court held that interim maintenance under Section 24 and permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act can be granted even where a marriage is declared void under Section 11, subject to the discretion of the court and the facts of the case.

This is important because it prevents a rigid technical argument that once a marriage is declared void, the financially weaker party must necessarily be left remediless under Sections 24 and 25.

14. Procedure to File Section 24 Application

A typical Section 24 application should include:

Cause title of the main matrimonial case.
Brief facts of marriage and pending proceedings.
Details of applicant’s income, if any.
Details of respondent’s income and assets, as known.
Monthly expenses of applicant.
Children’s expenses, where relevant.
Existing maintenance orders, if any.
Litigation expenses required.
Asset-liability disclosure affidavit.
Supporting documents.
Prayer for monthly maintenance and litigation expenses.

The application should be supported by an affidavit.

15. Documents Required for Section 24 Application

The following documents are usually useful:

Marriage proof, where available.
Petition copy of the pending HMA case.
Income tax returns.
Salary slips.
Bank statements.
Rent agreement or proof of residence expense.
Medical bills.
School fee receipts of children.
Household expense records.
Loan or EMI documents.
Proof of respondent’s income, if available.
Business or company records, if relevant.
Social media or lifestyle evidence, where legally usable.
Existing maintenance orders.
Asset and liability affidavit as per Rajnesh v. Neha.

A well-supported application is far stronger than a dramatic one.

16. Defence to a Section 24 Application

A respondent may contest Section 24 maintenance by showing:

The applicant has sufficient independent income.
The applicant has concealed employment or assets.
The claimed expenses are exaggerated.
The respondent has genuine liabilities.
The respondent has other legal dependants.
Maintenance has already been awarded in another proceeding.
The applicant has suppressed previous orders.
The respondent’s actual income is lower than alleged.
The applicant has earning capacity and is deliberately unemployed.
The amount claimed is disproportionate.

The defence must be documentary. Bare denial is usually weak.

17. Date from Which Maintenance May Be Granted

In maintenance proceedings, courts often consider whether maintenance should run from the date of application or the date of order. Rajnesh v. Neha dealt with this issue in the broader maintenance framework and recognised the hardship caused by delays in deciding interim maintenance.

In Section 24 applications, the applicant should specifically pray for maintenance from the date of application. The respondent, if opposing, should give reasons why such direction would be unfair on the facts.

18. What If the Respondent Does Not Pay?

If an interim maintenance order is passed and the respondent defaults, the applicant may seek enforcement before the concerned court. Depending on the nature of the proceeding and order, the court may consider execution, recovery, striking off defence in appropriate cases, or other legally permissible consequences.

Non-payment of maintenance can seriously prejudice the defaulting party, especially where the default is wilful.

19. Common Mistakes by Applicants

Applicants often weaken their Section 24 case by:

Not filing proper financial disclosure.
Making inflated claims without documents.
Concealing income.
Not disclosing previous maintenance orders.
Clubbing child expenses and personal expenses without clarity.
Not pleading litigation expenses separately.
Making vague allegations about respondent’s income.
Not filing bank statements or basic financial documents.
Treating maintenance as punishment.
Ignoring the standard set in Rajnesh v. Neha.

20. Common Mistakes by Respondents

Respondents often damage their own defence by:

Suppressing income.
Showing artificial unemployment.
Not filing complete bank statements.
Hiding business income.
Transferring assets after litigation.
Claiming excessive liabilities without proof.
Ignoring children’s expenses.
Filing incomplete disclosure affidavits.
Violating interim orders.
Taking a purely emotional defence instead of a financial defence.

A respondent’s strongest defence is transparent disclosure supported by documents.

21. Stronger Legal Strategy

For the applicant, the stronger route is:

File a short but precise Section 24 application.
Attach a complete asset-liability affidavit.
Give a realistic expense chart.
Separate personal maintenance, child expenses and litigation expenses.
Disclose all pending and previous maintenance proceedings.
Pray for maintenance from the date of application.
Avoid exaggerated figures.

For the respondent, the stronger route is:

File complete financial disclosure.
Challenge false claims through documents.
Seek set-off of existing maintenance orders.
Show genuine liabilities and dependants.
Demonstrate applicant’s actual income or earning capacity.
Avoid concealment at all costs.

The court is not impressed by theatrics. It is persuaded by records.

22. Delhi / NCR Relevance

In Delhi, Gurugram, Noida and NCR matrimonial litigation, Section 24 applications commonly arise in divorce, restitution, annulment and judicial separation proceedings. Family Courts generally expect parties to file financial disclosure in line with Rajnesh v. Neha and disclose prior maintenance orders.

For Delhi/NCR litigants, the practical focus should be on clean financial pleadings, complete disclosure, proper expense charts and avoidance of overlapping claims

24. Conclusion

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is a powerful interim remedy. It ensures that a financially weaker spouse is not prevented from surviving or contesting litigation due to lack of resources.

But it is not a blank cheque. The remedy depends on financial disclosure, need, capacity, fairness and documentary proof. After Rajnesh v. Neha, courts expect both parties to be transparent about income, assets, liabilities and previous maintenance orders.

The correct legal position is balanced: interim maintenance is not charity, not punishment, and not automatic. It is financial due process during matrimonial litigation.

For more family law and matrimonial law articles, visit www.fastracklegalsolutions.com.

FAQs

1. What is Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act?

Section 24 provides for maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings where either spouse has no independent income sufficient for support and litigation expenses during proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act.

2. Can a husband claim maintenance under Section 24?

Yes. Section 24 is gender-neutral and may be invoked by either the wife or the husband, provided the statutory conditions are satisfied.

3. What is maintenance pendente lite?

Maintenance pendente lite means interim maintenance granted during the pendency of matrimonial litigation.

4. Can litigation expenses be claimed under Section 24?

Yes. Section 24 expressly permits the court to award necessary expenses of the proceeding along with monthly maintenance.

5. Is interim maintenance automatic?

No. The applicant must show insufficient independent income and must support the claim with financial disclosure and documents.

6. Does Rajnesh v. Neha apply to Section 24 proceedings?

Yes. The principles of financial disclosure, asset-liability affidavits, avoidance of double recovery and structured maintenance adjudication are highly relevant to Section 24 applications.

7. Can maintenance be granted in a void marriage case?

Yes. The Supreme Court in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur held that Section 24 interim maintenance and Section 25 permanent alimony may be granted even where the marriage is declared void under Section 11, subject to facts and discretion.

8. What documents are needed for Section 24 maintenance?

Important documents include income proof, bank statements, ITRs, salary slips, rent proof, school fee receipts, medical bills, expense chart, existing maintenance orders and asset-liability affidavit.

Disclaimer

This article is intended solely for general legal awareness and informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice, legal opinion, solicitation, advertisement or an invitation to create an advocate-client relationship. Interim maintenance, litigation expenses and matrimonial proceedings are fact-specific and depend upon pleadings, income disclosure, assets, liabilities, applicable law, forum, jurisdiction, existing orders and evidence. Readers should seek independent legal advice before acting on the basis of this article.

Fastrack Legal Solutions

Table of Contents