Maintenance calculator: your household, modelled
Not an award predictor — Indian law has no maintenance formula, so nothing here produces one. It itemises what a household costs against what it takes in, does the same for the other side, and gives you the documented budget a maintenance application is actually argued on.
Free · No signup · Your figures never leave this device
There is no formula for maintenance in Indian law, and this tool does not invent one.
Gathering the whole law on maintenance into a single set of directions binding on every Family Court, District Court and Magistrate’s Court, the Supreme Court held that there is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance. What the judgment supplies is the list of things that must be disclosed and weighed — which is what the fields below are built from.
SourceRajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 24
Your household figures
Everything stays on this device. There is no upload, no account, no saved link and no analytics on these values — the charts and the PDF are both built in your browser.
This page covers marriages solemnised under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Section 2 of that Act applies it to Hindus in any form or development of the religion — including Virashaiva, Lingayat, Brahmo, Prarthana and Arya Samaj followers — and to Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs, as well as to anyone domiciled in India who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion. If your marriage was solemnised or registered under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, or under Muslim, Christian or Parsi personal law, a different statute governs it and the sections on this page do not apply to you.
This tool models household cash-flow. It does not estimate what a court will award, because Indian law has no formula for maintenance — the Supreme Court said in Rajnesh v. Neha that there is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum. What it does instead is add up what a household actually costs, set that against what it takes in, and show the same picture for the other side. Every number it displays is a sum or a difference of figures you typed in.
Key takeaways
- The output is a budget gap, not a maintenance figure. A gap is where an itemised claim starts, not what a court will order.
- Any calculator that returns "the court will award ₹X" is inventing a formula that does not exist in Indian law.
- An itemised, documented monthly budget is what a maintenance application is argued on. A single round figure is worth much less.
- Your figures never leave the browser: no upload, no account, no saved link, and no analytics on the values.
- The same inputs feed straight into the Affidavit of Assets and Liabilities, which is compulsory for both parties in every maintenance proceeding.
What a court weighs, and who has to prove it
Rajnesh v. Neha sets out the considerations, expressly as a non-exhaustive list rather than a scoring system. No weighting is attached to any of them — that is the discretion the statute leaves to the judge.
The applicant
What they need, and what they already have
- Actual income, and whether it is sufficient — not merely whether they are capable of earning
- Reasonable needs of the applicant and any dependent children
- Housing: what accommodation costs, or who is currently absorbing it
- Health, and any condition requiring recurring expenditure
- Care burden where children live with them
- Educational and professional qualifications, and actual employability
- Any assets or independent property
The respondent
Capacity, and what genuinely reduces it
- Actual income from all sources, and earning capacity where income is concealed
- Documented liabilities — with liabilities created after the dispute treated sceptically
- Other people they are legally obliged to maintain
- Their own reasonable living expenses
- Any existing maintenance order, which is set off rather than added to
- Conduct over disclosure, which can attract an adverse inference
The marriage
The context both sides are measured against
- Standard of living in the matrimonial home — the centre of the test
- Duration of the marriage
- Whether the applicant gave up employment for the family
- Number and ages of children, and who they live with
- Education costs, normally borne by the father and shared proportionately where the mother earns sufficiently
- Serious disability or ill health of a party, child or dependant
No percentage weighting attaches to any factor in this grid. The balance is struck case by case: the award must be neither so extravagant as to be oppressive for the payer, nor so meagre that it drives the applicant to penury.
What this tool models, and what it refuses to
Most maintenance calculators online apply an invented percentage and present the result as though a court would arrive at it. That is misleading twice over. There is no percentage in the Hindu Marriage Act, in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita or in the Domestic Violence Act; and the Supreme Court, gathering the whole law on maintenance into one set of directions in Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324, said in terms that there is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance.
So this tool does not produce an award figure at all. It produces the thing that actually gets argued about in a maintenance hearing: a household budget. What does this household cost each month, item by item? What does it take in? What is the difference? And on the other side — what are the declared resources, what commitments are being put forward against them, and what is left?
That is arithmetic on your own figures, and it is defensible precisely because it claims nothing beyond arithmetic. The judgment is what turns those figures into a number, and that is a matter for a court on the evidence.
| It shows you | It will not show you | Why |
|---|---|---|
| The monthly gap between stated household needs and household resources. | A maintenance amount. | No statutory formula exists. Quantum is discretionary and fact-specific. |
| A breakdown of where the monthly needs go — housing, food, children, medical, transport, loans. | A "reasonable" figure for any of those lines. | What is reasonable depends on the standard of living of the matrimonial home, which the tool cannot see. |
| The other side’s declared resources, less the commitments they would put forward. | Their "maintenance capacity as determined by a court". | A court tests each deduction. Some carry weight, some do not, and it may estimate where disclosure is poor. |
| A side-by-side comparison of both households on one scale. | A probability, a success rate, or a likely outcome. | Nothing in this tool has any predictive content whatsoever. |
| A what-if comparison on figures you supply yourself. | A view on which scenario is more likely. | Both scenarios are yours. The tool has no basis to prefer one. |
If the household you describe is short by ₹40,000 a month, that does not mean a court will order ₹40,000. It means you can show, with documents, what the household costs and what it has. That is a far stronger position in a hearing than a percentage claim — and it is the position the disclosure affidavit is designed to put you in.
Why these particular inputs, and where they come from
The fields are not arbitrary. Each one maps to something Rajnesh v. Neha identifies as relevant to quantum, or to something the disclosure affidavit annexed to that judgment actually asks for. That is the sense in which the judgment informs this tool: it decides what has to be gathered and disclosed, not what the answer is.
| What the tool asks for | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Applicant’s income, and other income | The Court held that having some income is not a bar to a claim, and that mere capacity to earn is not a ground to reduce one. What matters is whether actual income is sufficient to maintain the standard of living of the matrimonial home. |
| Housing, food, children, medical, transport, loans, other | Reasonable needs are a listed factor, and the Court treated children’s expenses — including education and reasonable coaching — as a head of their own rather than part of the spousal figure. |
| Respondent’s income and other income | Financial capacity and actual income are the principal upward drivers. Where income is not disclosed, a court may draw an adverse inference, and judgments acknowledge that some guesswork is not ruled out. |
| Respondent’s documented loan instalments | Genuine liabilities reduce capacity. Liabilities created after the dispute began are looked at sceptically, which is why the tool asks for documented EMIs rather than a round figure. |
| Cost of the respondent’s other legal dependants | Only people there is a legal obligation towards — aged parents, a child of another marriage — reduce capacity. People they choose to support do not. |
| Respondent’s own living expenses | Their reasonable expenses for their own maintenance are expressly part of the balance the Court described. |
| Any existing maintenance order, and its direction | Overlapping orders are adjusted, not accumulated. The Court directed that an earlier order be disclosed and that the later court consider a set-off against it. |
| Children living with the applicant | A child’s claim is independent of the spouse’s and stays open to variation under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act at any time in the child’s welfare. |
The tool does not ask for names, addresses, account numbers, employer details or anything else that would identify you. It needs monthly figures and nothing more, and it keeps them on your device.
How to use the output without damaging your own case
The most useful thing this tool does is force an itemised budget. Most people arrive at a maintenance hearing with a round number in their head and no breakdown behind it, and a round number is the easiest thing in the world to cross-examine.
So build the expense side from documents rather than memory. Twelve months of bank and card statements will produce a more accurate and far more credible household budget than any estimate, and every line you can support with a receipt is a line the other side cannot simply deny.
- If your documented needs come out much lower than you expected, check what you have left out — housing is the item people most often understate, because a parent or a sibling is currently absorbing it.
- If they come out very high, expect to justify the gap between the household’s spending and the standard of living during the marriage. Have the answer ready before you are asked.
- If you are the person who would be paying, the same modelling works in reverse: it shows which of your commitments genuinely reduce capacity and which will be tested.
- Never present a percentage as an entitlement. There is no entitlement to a percentage of anything in Indian law, and framing a claim that way invites the correct reply that no such rule exists.
- Take the PDF to your advocate before the hearing rather than after. The itemisation is a checklist of what your affidavit has to establish.
Not the percentage — the monthly cost of the household at the standard of living it had. Everything a court weighs runs through that figure, and it is the only one you can prove with documents rather than argument.
More questions about this page
Does this calculator tell me how much maintenance I will get?▼
Is there a 25 per cent rule for maintenance in India?▼
What is a "monthly budget gap" and how is it different from maintenance?▼
What does the calculator do with my financial information?▼
Why does it ask for the other side’s expenses as well as their income?▼
What if the other side hides their income?▼
Can the person who would be paying use this tool?▼
What should I do after using the calculator?▼
Official sources checked
The statutes, rules and regulator pages the statements on this page were checked against.
- Rajnesh v. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324No straitjacket formula for quantum; the factors that are weighed; the mandatory affidavit of disclosure; maintenance from the date of application; set-off of overlapping orders.
- The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Sections 24, 25 and 26Maintenance during the proceedings, permanent alimony and its variation, and orders for children which stay open to variation.
- The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 144Replaced Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 from 1 July 2024.
You are here
Modelling your household finances
What to do next
- 1
Put those figures into the disclosure affidavit
It is compulsory for both parties in every maintenance proceeding, and a respondent who delays can have their defence struck off.
Generate the Assets & Liabilities affidavit → - 2
Decide which maintenance route to file under
Section 24 needs a pending matrimonial case; Section 144 BNSS and the Domestic Violence Act do not. The choice changes the court, the speed and the enforcement powers.
Compare the three routes → - 3
Collect the documents behind every line of that budget
Salary slips, three years of returns and three years of bank statements are what turn an itemised budget into evidence.
Work through the document checklist →