Key Judicial Decisions

After a mother spent INR 26 lakh raising her child alone for 16 years, the Telangana High Court took a firm view of the husband’s minimal contribution and directed him to pay INR 30 lakh before visitation could begin. This case highlights financial manipulation patterns often seen in family disputes.

The Telangana High Court held that when a husband’s conduct amounts to cruelty approaching depravity, the law cannot compel the wife to remain in the marriage. Once dignity and safety are compromised, the Court’s duty shifts from preserving the marital bond to protecting the aggrieved spouse.

In a significant ruling on cross-border child custody, the Andhra Pradesh High Court held the mother in contempt for wilfully failing to produce the child in an ongoing US–India dispute. The judgment clarifies the enforceability of domestic court orders despite foreign jurisdiction claims, applies the principles of wilful disobedience, and sets an important precedent for international custody enforcement in India.

A wife claimed that her NRI status and U.S. citizenship stripped Indian courts of jurisdiction over the couple’s divorce and custody dispute. The Telangana High Court rejected this argument, reaffirming that foreign citizenship cannot be used to block Indian matrimonial proceedings when the couple last resided together in India.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the creation of a charge over the husband’s share in family properties, ruling that it ‘benefits the interest of the wife and minor son.’ This case clarifies when courts can secure maintenance using property, how desertion must be proven, and why interest rates must comply with Section 34 CPC.

Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld a Family Court order granting a father weekly visitation rights while retaining custody of the minor daughter with the mother, holding that in child custody and guardianship disputes under the Guardians and Wards Act and Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, the paramount consideration is the welfare of the child, not the statutory rights of either parent.

When Katragadda Koteswara Rao claimed ₹8,000 monthly income, his wife exposed crores in hidden assets. The AP High Court's 2025 judgment awarded ₹50,000 maintenance and set dual precedents: courts will pierce financial fraud, and daughter shall receive support beyond age 18 until marriage or employment. This landmark case demonstrates how the judiciary protects vulnerable family members from calculated deception and redefines parental accountability in maintenance law.

Confused about where your case stands? Get a Preparatory Assessment   : Factual, Sharp and Tailored to your situation 📄 Get a crisp, slide-based summary of the judgment. Download  the Visual Carousel (PDF) Follow us on LinkedIn  for real, practical family-law insights that matter. The Andhra Pradesh High Court delivered an important ruling in a maintenance matter, offering clarity on how courts must balance moral obligation with financial capability when fixing maintenance

The AP High Court reaffirmed that husbands can also be subjected to cruelty in marriage. Dismissing the wife’s Section 151 CPC petition, the Court upheld the divorce decree, holding that mental cruelty including persistent quarrels, threats, and emotional harassment can justify dissolution even without physical violence. This strengthens the legal interpretation of cruelty against men.