Chhattisgarh High Court
Family LawCivil Procedure and Evidence

The husband’s income warranted increasing the wife’s monthly rent allowance to Rs. 7,000.

SMT. INDU DEVI vs PARSHURAM

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: October 05, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
The husband’s income warranted increasing the wife’s monthly rent allowance to Rs. 7,000.. SMT. INDU DEVI vs PARSHURAM. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant-wife sought relief under Sections 18–23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The trial court rejected her application; on appeal, the Additional Sessions Judge partly allowed it and awarded her Rs.3,000 per month towards house rent.

Source reference: para. 5

In revision, she sought an increase, relying on a rent agreement showing monthly rent of Rs.10,000 and documents concerning her husband’s salary. She also sought compensation for alleged physical and mental harassment.

Source reference: para. 6

The husband opposed both claims, disputing the harassment allegations and maintaining that the rent award was appropriate; he stated that he had taken voluntary retirement and received a pension, but his counsel could not state its amount.

Source reference: para. 7
02

Issues

Whether the monthly house-rent allowance of Rs.3,000 awarded to the wife should be enhanced in light of the husband’s income and the evidence of rent

Source reference: paras. 6, 9

Whether the wife was entitled to monetary compensation for the alleged physical and mental harassment

Source reference: paras. 6, 10
03

Law Applied

The revision was brought under Section 442 read with Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, challenging relief granted in proceedings under Sections 18–23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Source reference: para. 4

The Court assessed the adequacy of the house-rent award by reference to the husband’s disclosed income and the circumstances on record.

Source reference: para. 9

It declined monetary compensation for alleged harassment where sufficient evidence had not been adduced.

Source reference: para. 10
04

Reasoning

The husband’s affidavit disclosed gross monthly salary of Rs.1,18,000, while a document produced by the wife showed gross salary of Rs.1,37,299 for July 2025.

Source reference: para. 9

Although the husband had taken voluntary retirement, the Court noted that he may have received a substantial retirement amount and that his counsel could not provide details of it.

Source reference: para. 9

In light of the disclosed income, the existing Rs.3,000 monthly rent award was inadequate, warranting enhancement to Rs.7,000.

Source reference: para. 9

By contrast, the wife had not adduced sufficient evidence to support compensation for physical and mental harassment.

Source reference: para. 10
05

Holding

The revision was partly allowed.

The monthly house-rent award was enhanced from Rs.3,000 to Rs.7,000, payable by the husband within 15 days of each month, with effect from 18 July 2025.

Source reference: para. 11

The request for monetary compensation for alleged physical and mental harassment was rejected for want of sufficient evidence.

Source reference: para. 10
06

Acts & Sections Cited

8 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20232

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 20056

Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

SMT. INDU DEVIvsPARSHURAM

Chhattisgarh High Court · October 05, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment