Mumbai: The earning capacity and professional qualifications of a woman is to be considered while deciding permanent alimony in a divorce case, the Bombay high court said in an important judgment.

Taking into account the fact that a city resident had obtained a diploma in fashion designing and planned to make a career in Mumbai, a Division Bench of Justice B H Marlapalle and Justice Ravi Deshpande rejected the plea of a former air hostess Jaspreet for hiking the alimony. The judges asked her ex husband Jaspal, a senior employee with Air India to pay her Rs 20,000 per month or a lump sum of Rs 20 lakh.

“If she (Jaspreet) desires to stay at Mumbai or Delhi, it cannot be accepted that she would be without any professional or employment income in fashion design or any other related field,’’ said the judges. “She must stand on her own as a professional and she appears to have made her own arrangement with her sister to stay at Mumbai by choice and obviously to pursue a career. She cannot expect as a matter of legal right, that the amount of permanent alimony granted, must include the financial requirements for her stay at Mumbai or for that matter at Delhi.’’

Jaspal had moved the family court for divorce in 1997 after one-and-a-half years of marriage, alleging cruelty. Subsequently, the couple obtained a divorce by mutual consent.

While Jaspreet challenged the alimony amount of Rs 20,000, Jaspal opposed the alimony arrangement itself. Jaspreet claimed that her exhusband earned around Rs 2 lakh per month and produced his income tax returns between 2001 and 2003 which ranged from Rs 18 lakh to Rs 24 lakh. Jaspreet claimed 20-30% of this income as permanent alimony arguing that she was “unemployed and was entitled to live a comfortable life till such time that she gets remarried.’’

His lawyers further pointed out that it was not conceivable that Jaspreet with her qualification in fashion design would remain unemployed. “On the contrary, in a city such as Mumbai or Delhi she would get professional assignments or a job with a good salary,’’ they argued. The court upheld the order of alimony, but declined to enhance it. The court said if she chooses to remain in Mumbai, “she cannot claim any provision for her residence.’’

On a request by Jaspal, the HC stayed this order for six weeks on the condition that he continues to pay the monthly maintenance.

(Names of the couple have been changed to protect their identity)