HomeOther LawsSupreme Court Disapproves of ‘Saudabazi’ in Matrimonial Case, Fixes ₹8 Lakh Alimony

Supreme Court Disapproves of ‘Saudabazi’ in Matrimonial Case, Fixes ₹8 Lakh Alimony

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court has fixed a lump sum alimony of ₹8 lakh in a matrimonial dispute where the wife had sought Rs. 20 lakh from her estranged husband, a Zomato delivery boy.

The Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan questioned the wife, a graduate, on her demand. “Who asked you to seek ₹20 lakh?”

The woman responded that she wished to pursue further studies and that her husband was not working properly with Zomato.

Justice Pardiwala, however, remarked, “Dekhiye, ye saudabazi achi nahi. Ek saal mein shaadi khatam ho gayi” (See, such bargaining is not good. The marriage ended within a year).

Taking into account the circumstances, the court ruled that ₹8 lakh would be a fair settlement.

Read More: CBIC Withdraws Circular on ITC Reversal Procedure for Post-Sale Discounts

Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma is the Content Editor at JurisHour. He has been writing about the Indian legal market. He has covered tax & company litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and Various Tribunals. Amit graduated from MLSU Law College with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. from MLSU, Udaipur, Rajasthan. An Advocate in Taxation, and practised in Tribunals as well as Rajasthan High Court and pursued Masters in Constitutional Law. He started out small with little resources but a big plan to take tax legal education to the remotest locations across India and eventually to the world. His vision is to make tax related legal developments accessible to the masses.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : MARCH 4, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for March 4, 2026.GSTEXECUTIVE CIRCULAR CAN’T CURTAIL STATUTORY...

When Service Tax Is Shown Separately In Invoices, Assessee Can’t Later Claim Cum-Tax Benefit Merely Because Tenant Failed To Pay Tax: CESTAT

The Bengaluru Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), has upheld...

ITAT Remands Rs. 1.47 Crore Addition Over Unexplained Cash Deposits Under S. 69A

The Ahmedabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has set aside an addition...

Dept. Failed to Prove Clandestine Removal In ‘Gold Mohar’ Pan Masala Case: CESTAT Quashes Cash and Goods Confiscation 

The Allahabad Bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has set...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : MARCH 4, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for March 4, 2026.GSTEXECUTIVE CIRCULAR CAN’T CURTAIL STATUTORY...

When Service Tax Is Shown Separately In Invoices, Assessee Can’t Later Claim Cum-Tax Benefit Merely Because Tenant Failed To Pay Tax: CESTAT

The Bengaluru Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), has upheld...

ITAT Remands Rs. 1.47 Crore Addition Over Unexplained Cash Deposits Under S. 69A

The Ahmedabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has set aside an addition...