29 April 2022
Delhi High Court refuses to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the man who didn’t pay the salary of the child’s nanny.
[Kinri Dhir vs Veer Singh] The Delhi High Court recently decided to institute civil contempt of court proceedings against a husband who refused to pay payment to the nanny assigned to care for his sole kid, who is currently in the custody of his separated wife.
Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing a wife’s request for civil contempt proceedings against her husband for failing to follow the orders of a Family Court in Saket, which had ordered the husband to pay 4.25 lakh as rent for the serviced apartment, as well as 1 lakh each for wife and minor son’s maintenance, and another 1 lakh for daily groceries in an order dated November 9, 2021.
The couple married in Taiwan in 2018 and had a son who was born out of wedlock. The woman claimed that her husband harassed her sexually, emotionally, and physically in front of the Family Court.
She then filed a motion in the Family Court, citing the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 and the Guardians and Wards Act of 1890.
She has been renting a flat in Defence Colony, New Delhi, since then.
The woman claimed before Justice Prasad that her husband had failed to follow the Family Court’s directions. She pointed out that the husband hasn’t paid the nanny hired for their lone child, a salary of 80,000 dollars.
The spouse, on the other hand, claimed that he had been paying all of the Family Court’s orders. He went on to say that the son doesn’t need any additional attention and that the wife was merely trying to make life difficult for him.
Following a review of the opposing arguments, the court observed that the husband had produced an income and expenditure statement indicating that he was paying roughly Rs. 8.90 lakh per month to support his wife and son.
“A review of the husband’s income and expenditure declaration reveals that; he spending $8,90,947 per month to support his wife and minor kid. At this point, it’s worth noting that; the husband living with the wife at the time the income and expenditure affidavit filed. He moves out of the premises after filing the income affidavit. Despite the fact that; he has moved out of the premises, the cost not decreased…… It has been claimed that; he has been paying a monthly rent of Rs. 4.5 lakhs for the serviced flat. He also pays $130,937 per month for the housekeeper and cook’s room rent, as well as $76,744 per month for the housekeeping and cook’s salaries, according to Justice Prasad.
As a result, the Court stated that; the dispute before it was limited to whether or not non-payment of the nanny’s wage constituted contempt.
The Court stated that this would be an issue of interpreting the Family Court’s ruling.
In this respect, the Court highlighted the husband’s claim that; the nanny employed at the time of the income and spending document filed by a medical professional; who had been engaged at a time when the young son’s health was deteriorating. However, it pointed out that this job does not exist now.
The Court agreed with the husband’s claim that 80,000 for a nanny is excessive in light of the new circumstances.
“In light of the changing circumstances, this Court considers that; an award of $80,000 is excessively disproportionate for a nanny who has been hired to care for a kid.
The husband went on to say that he had given the wife a total of 24 lakh, which would cover her costs until January 2022.
Given the facts, the Court determined that the husband did not act with deliberate disobedience by failing to follow the Family Court’s directives.
Geeta Luthra and Rebecca John, both senior advocates, represented the wife and husband, respectively.