The Delhi High Court has affirmed that interim maintenance awarded to a spouse must continue during the pendency of an appeal against a divorce decree. This significant Delhi High Court ruling, pronounced on July 14, 2026, reinforces the financial protection available to a financially dependent spouse throughout the entire legal process.

A Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Renu Bhatnagar delivered the judgment in a case where the Appellant-wife sought continuation of support while challenging the dissolution of her marriage.

Interim maintenance during divorce appeals mandated

The recent judgment from the Delhi High Court clarifies a critical aspect of matrimonial law. It mandates the continuation of interim maintenance payments even when a divorce decree is under appeal.

This decision stems from an application filed by an appellant-wife, identified as XXX, under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC). She sought to continue receiving financial support, originally awarded by the Family Court, during her appeal against the divorce.

Procedural history of the matrimonial dispute

The marriage between XXX, an MBA (HR) graduate, and YYY, a serving officer in the Indian Army, was solemnized on December 10, 2012, in Delhi Cantonment. The couple separated on May 22, 2015, and have no children.

YYY initiated divorce proceedings under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), citing cruelty and desertion. During these proceedings, XXX applied for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the HMA.

The Family Court at Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, issued an order on January 12, 2024. It directed the deduction of 30% of YYY’s gross salary, after statutory deductions, to be remitted to XXX monthly, effective from May 18, 2022.

This maintenance order was challenged by YYY but upheld by the Delhi High Court on March 21, 2024, in MAT.APP.(F.C.) 91/2024, thus attaining finality. However, on July 19, 2025, the Family Court granted YYY a divorce.

Aggrieved by the divorce decree, XXX filed an appeal (MAT.APP.(F.C.) 306/2025) under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. She simultaneously sought continuation of her interim maintenance, but no immediate order was passed on this specific prayer.

Supreme Court intervenes, granting liberty to appeal

With no decision on her maintenance during the appeal, the appellant approached the Supreme Court of India. She filed an SLP (C) No. 34613/2025, seeking clarity on the matter.

On January 8, 2026, the Supreme Court clarified that issuing notice in matrimonial matters adequately safeguards parties’ interests. More importantly, it granted the appellant explicit liberty to urge her prayer for interim maintenance continuation before the Delhi High Court.

This directive ensured that her application would be considered on its merits after hearing the respondent. Consequently, the Delhi High Court took up the present application, reserved on April 29, 2026, leading to the July 14, 2026, judgment.

The “during the proceeding” debate under HMA Section 24

The central legal question before the High Court revolved around the interpretation of the phrase “during the proceeding” in Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. This section allows a court to order a spouse to pay maintenance to the other during the pendency of “any proceeding under this Act.”

The appellant’s counsel, Mr. Vikram Singh and Ms. Nidhi Tiwari, argued that an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act is not a fresh proceeding. Instead, it’s a continuation of the original matrimonial proceedings.

Therefore, they contended that maintenance granted under Section 24 HMA should necessarily continue throughout the appeal. They highlighted the wife’s lack of independent income and her reliance on parents for daily needs.

Respondent’s arguments against continued maintenance

Conversely, the respondent’s counsel, Ms. Purnima Maheshwari, Mr. Mukul Aryan, and Mr. Kailash Golani, opposed the application. They asserted that “proceeding” in Section 24 HMA refers only to the trial court proceedings, which concluded with the divorce decree.

They relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in *Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur* (2025 SCC OnLine SC 299). This case held that Section 24 HMA operates only during proceedings before the court of first instance, and that Section 25 HMA provides the appropriate post-decree remedy.

The respondent also argued that the appellant, an MBA (HR) graduate with prior experience, is capable of maintaining herself. They pointed to alleged transfers of maintenance funds to her father and sister, suggesting a lack of genuine financial hardship.

Furthermore, they noted that the appellant had a pending application under Section 25 of the HMA before the Family Court. This, they argued, was the correct avenue for her to pursue post-decree maintenance.

High Court’s detailed reasoning and legal precedents

The Delhi High Court meticulously examined the arguments, focusing on the nature of an appeal and the intent of Section 24 HMA. The Court concluded that an appeal is indeed a continuation of the original proceedings, a principle consistently upheld by the Supreme Court.

The bench cited *Jagdish Singh v. Madhuri Devi* (2008) 10 SCC 497, where the Supreme Court explicitly stated that an appeal is a continuation of the suit. This foundational principle was crucial to their decision.

Interpreting “any proceeding under this act”

The Court further referenced *Hansaben v. Ashwinkumar Kacharabhai Patel* (2014 SCC OnLine Guj 15560). In this case, the Gujarat High Court held that an appeal under the HMA constitutes “any proceedings under this Act,” thereby empowering the appellate court to grant interim relief under Section 24.

The Gujarat High Court, echoing the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s reasoning in *Jalsutram Annapurnamma v. Jalasutram Ramakrishna Sastry* (AIR 1959 AP 49), emphasized that the right of appeal itself stems from the HMA. Therefore, the appeal is undeniably a “proceeding under the Act.”

The Delhi High Court unequivocally agreed with this interpretation. It stressed that when the appellant challenges a divorce decree under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, she acts as a party to the same proceeding that began with the original HMA petition (HMA No. 15/2022).

The subject matter, parties, and cause of action remain unchanged. Finality is not achieved merely by the trial court’s judgment; it persists until all appellate remedies are exhausted. Thus, “proceeding” in Section 24 HMA encompasses the appellate stage.

Distinguishing Section 24 and Section 25 HMA

The High Court carefully addressed the respondent’s reliance on *Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur*. It acknowledged that *Sukhdev Singh* distinguishes between Section 24 (interim maintenance during proceedings) and Section 25 (permanent alimony after a decree).

However, the Court clarified that *Sukhdev Singh* did not specifically address whether maintenance awarded under Section 24 continues during an appeal against a decree. It focused on the stage of final adjudication, not interim adjudication during an appeal.

Therefore, the Delhi High Court held that *Sukhdev Singh* does not serve as a bar to continuing Section 24 maintenance during the appellate stage. Section 24 remains applicable as long as the appeal is pending and the original proceeding has not attained finality.

Addressing respondent’s claims of employability and financial transfers

The respondent’s arguments concerning the appellant’s employability and financial transfers were also dismissed by the Court. They had contended that the appellant, being an MBA (HR) graduate, was fully capable of earning and maintaining herself.

The Delhi High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s established position in *Shallja v. Khobanna* (2018) 12 SCC 199. This ruling clearly states that a mere capability to earn cannot be a reason to deny maintenance to a spouse who isn’t actually earning.

The Court noted that the Family Court had already rejected this argument in its January 12, 2024, order, after examining the appellant’s income affidavit, ITRs, and bank statements. That decision was later affirmed by the Delhi High Court on March 21, 2024, and had attained finality.

Consequently, the respondent was barred from re-agitating a point already decided between the parties. The distinction between a spouse’s potential to earn and their actual current income is fundamental in determining maintenance needs.

Transfers to family members: an internal arrangement

Regarding the transfers of maintenance amounts to the appellant’s father and sister, the Court reiterated the Family Court’s previous finding. The January 12, 2024, order had concluded these were internal family arrangements, as her family was supporting her daily expenses.

This, the Court asserted, cannot imply that the appellant doesn’t need maintenance. The respondent had the opportunity to challenge this finding in an earlier appeal, which was dismissed. Therefore, this contention could not be reheard.

Section 25 application not a bar to interim relief

Finally, the argument that a pending Section 25 HMA application before the Family Court should preclude interim maintenance was deemed unpersuasive. The Court emphasized that Section 25 operates independently, primarily at or after the decree stage for permanent alimony.

Section 24, conversely, is specifically for maintenance during the pendency of proceedings, which now includes appeals. The existence of a Section 25 remedy, which may take considerable time to adjudicate, does not negate the appellant’s entitlement under Section 24 during appellate proceedings.

Denying interim support during this period would undermine the very purpose of Section 24, leaving the appellant without financial means during a crucial legal battle. It would cause undue hardship, which the law aims to prevent.

Practical implications for family law and litigants

This Delhi High Court judgment carries significant implications for family law in India. It strengthens the position of financially vulnerable spouses by ensuring continuous support throughout the often-lengthy appeals process in matrimonial disputes.

The ruling underscores the judiciary’s commitment to preventing financial distress for litigants. It confirms that the legal definition of “proceeding” extends beyond the trial court, embracing the full appellate journey.

For legal practitioners, it provides a clear precedent regarding the scope of Section 24 HMA during appeals. It also highlights the importance of the Supreme Court’s inherent powers under Article 136, enabling it to grant liberty for such applications to be heard at appropriate forums.

Milestone	Date	Significance
Marriage Solemnized	10.12.2012	Beginning of marital union
Separation Date	22.05.2015	Parties begin living separately
Interim Maintenance Application Filed	18.05.2022	Appellant seeks financial support
Family Court Interim Maintenance Order	12.01.2024	30% of respondent’s gross salary ordered
High Court Dismisses Maintenance Appeal	21.03.2024	Confirms validity of interim maintenance
Family Court Grants Divorce	19.07.2025	Original marriage dissolved
Appellant Files Appeal & Application	25.08.2025	Challenges divorce, seeks continued maintenance
Supreme Court Liberty Granted	08.01.2026	Allows High Court to hear maintenance application
High Court Reserves Judgment	29.04.2026	Final arguments heard on application
High Court Pronounces Judgment	14.07.2026	Interim maintenance ordered to continue

The judgment also reiterates that a spouse’s earning capacity alone isn’t sufficient to deny maintenance if they are not actually employed. This protects individuals who, despite qualifications, face barriers to re-entering the workforce or are primarily focused on litigation.

Furthermore, the ruling reinforces the idea that an application for permanent alimony under Section 25 HMA does not override the immediate need for interim support. Both provisions serve distinct purposes within the framework of matrimonial law.

Looking ahead: ensuring financial equity in appeals

The Delhi High Court’s decision ensures a more equitable playing field for spouses during the often protracted and emotionally draining process of appealing a divorce decree. It prevents a situation where a dependent spouse could be left without financial support precisely when they need it most—during ongoing litigation.

The Court has explicitly ordered the respondent to continue paying 30% of his current gross salary, after statutory deductions, directly to the appellant. This payment is effective from August 25, 2025, the date the application for continuation was filed.

This arrangement will remain in effect until the final disposal of MAT. APP. (F.C.) No. 306/2025 or until further orders from the Court, whichever comes earlier. The employer has also been directed to deduct and remit the amount as per the original order.

It’s important to note that the pending application for permanent alimony under Section 25 HMA remains unaffected by this ruling. The appellant is free to pursue that independently at the Family Court.

This judgment serves as a robust affirmation of spousal maintenance rights. It solidifies the principle that financial protection should not cease prematurely just because a case moves from a trial court to an appellate forum.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is interim maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act?

Interim maintenance, also known as maintenance pendente lite, is financial support awarded to a spouse during the pendency of matrimonial proceedings. It falls under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and is designed to cover the living expenses and legal costs of the financially weaker spouse while the case is ongoing.

Why did the Delhi High Court rule that maintenance must continue during an appeal?

The Delhi High Court ruled that an appeal is considered a continuation of the original matrimonial proceedings, not a new one. Therefore, the phrase “during the proceeding” in Section 24 of the HMA applies to the appellate stage as well, ensuring that the financially dependent spouse continues to receive support while the divorce decree is contested.

What happens if a spouse is capable of earning but isn’t currently employed?

The Supreme Court has clarified that a mere capability to earn is not sufficient grounds to deny maintenance. Courts will assess a spouse’s actual earning status and financial needs. If a spouse is not earning, even if qualified, they may still be entitled to interim maintenance to ensure their support during the legal process.