Dismissing a man’s claim that his expenses exceeded his salary because he lived in one of the most expensive cities in the world, a Mumbai court ordered him to pay alimony to his ex-wife.

The court order last week concerned the wife’s plea seeking interim measures under the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act.

The man, an architect, told the court he was making Rs 2.31 lakh and that was the “bare minimum” for his survival in Dubai, which he said was one of the most expensive cities of the world, expressing their inability to pay for maintenance. .

“As such, neither person nor respondent. 1, who is highly skilled, resides in the most expensive city of Dubai, visits many other countries like China etc, incurs mobile spending over Rs 10,000, can’t believe he is now unemployed / unemployed. It only shows to avoid keeping the plaintiff… the respondent (is) by falsely stating that he is unemployed. Failure to maintain the claimant is also an act of domestic violence, ”the court said.

He ordered the man to provide his wife with accommodation in their house if she chooses to reside with him, as well as Rs 20,000 as maintenance or Rs 30,000 including rent if she lives in a separate house. until the case is heard for a final order.

The couple married in 2017.

In her court application, the woman said her parents at the time gave Rs 50,000 in cash and gold to the man and his family members. She alleged that a month later a request for Rs 6 lakh was made for a dowry, of which Rs 4 lakh was paid.

The woman further claimed that her husband’s family demanded that the interior decoration of their house be done with the expenses incurred by her parents. She alleged other domestic violence, claiming that she had been abused and was not allowed to receive medical treatment.

Her husband had denied claims that they never asked for money and that a check drawn in their favor was a friendly loan, which was returned. He said a false complaint was filed a year after he filed for divorce. He also claimed that his wife had a job and earned Rs 50,000.

The man had also claimed that the complaint was made to harass them as they confronted his wife’s parents over hiding his mental illness before their marriage. The court took into consideration the conversations between the couple to conclude that this claim was false.

The court said the evidence, including their arrangements at the wedding, the honeymoon destination and the architecture at home, showed that they were both from affluent upper-middle-class families.

The court said the evidence showed it was a prima facie case of domestic violence, with the woman being harassed for money and because of her illness. He said that being a working woman is no reason to deny him maintenance and housing.