Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge Dehradun

What the court was looking at

By the date of the petition the marriage was 33 years old. There were 4 children, so child maintenance sat alongside the wife's own claim. The husband was described as retired lt. colonel.

Why this one gets cited

1/3rd Family Resource Cake principle.

How it fits the framework

Since Rajnesh v. Neha in 2020, every maintenance order in India is meant to work through the same list of factors: the standard of living the marriage ran at, what the applicant reasonably needs, whether she is qualified and earning, and whether she gave up work for the family. A judgement from 1997 was decided before that list was written down, but the reasoning behind it is the reasoning courts had been applying for decades. There is a fuller account in how maintenance is calculated.

Judgements near this one

Ranked by court, then by income bracket and marriage length rather than by date, so the comparison is with cases a court would actually treat as similar. Every row links to its own page.