From the facts stated by you, the key issue is not merely the quantum of settlement but ensuring that the settlement agreement is drafted in a manner that completely and finally resolves all future financial disputes while adequately safeguarding the child’s interests. Since the mediation has already progressed substantially and the alimony amount of ₹15 lakh has been agreed, it may not be strategically advisable to reopen that component unless there are compelling reasons.
Your primary concern appears to be that after accepting ₹15 lakh as full and final settlement, your wife may subsequently seek additional amounts towards school fees, educational expenses, medical expenses, extracurricular activities, or day-to-day maintenance of the child. This concern is legitimate because unless the settlement terms are carefully drafted, disputes regarding the child can continue even after matrimonial issues are resolved.
In my view, outright refusal to provide anything for the child may not be viewed favourably either by the mediator or by the court, particularly when the child is only six years old. Similarly, withdrawing the proposed ₹10 lakh child corpus altogether may complicate the settlement and may push the matter back into litigation. A more balanced approach would be to clearly distinguish between the wife’s settlement and the child’s welfare.
One practical solution would be to create a dedicated investment in the child’s name, with appropriate safeguards. Instead of a simple FD where the mother may later contend that the amount is insufficient for current needs, you may propose that the ₹10 lakh amount be invested in a long-term instrument for the exclusive benefit of the child, with the principal remaining locked until a specified age or educational milestone. The settlement should specifically record that this amount represents your contribution towards the child’s future education and welfare and that neither party shall have any claim over the principal amount except for the benefit of the child.
If the other side insists upon contribution towards current educational expenses, you may propose a capped and clearly defined arrangement rather than an open-ended liability. For example, you may agree to contribute a fixed amount towards school fees upon production of actual receipts, while specifically recording that all other routine day-to-day expenses, food, clothing, transportation, and household expenses shall be borne by the custodial parent. This prevents future disputes regarding undefined financial obligations.
You may also consider proposing that any major educational or medical expense exceeding a specified amount shall be discussed and mutually approved by both parents in advance. Since you have stated that the child was shifted to a more expensive school without your consent, the settlement should ideally contain a clause that neither parent shall unilaterally incur substantial educational expenses and thereafter seek reimbursement from the other parent.
As regards the mother’s earning capacity, unless you possess reliable evidence of her income, the mediation may not become the appropriate forum to litigate that issue. Your focus should remain on achieving a comprehensive settlement rather than proving hidden earnings. However, if she is indeed carrying on a business, that fact can be used during negotiations to support the position that both parents should contribute towards the child’s upbringing according to their respective capacities.
The most sustainable proposal in your situation appears to be retention of the ₹10 lakh child corpus together with a carefully drafted clause providing that the amount is exclusively for the child, coupled with clearly defined obligations regarding current school fees and major future expenses. This approach protects your relationship with the child, demonstrates your commitment as a father, and substantially reduces the risk of recurring financial litigation. If properly drafted, the settlement can also record that all claims of maintenance, alimony, past, present and future monetary claims between the spouses stand fully and finally settled, leaving only the specifically agreed child-related obligations surviving.
The most important aspect is not the amount itself but ensuring that the mediation settlement expressly specifies what expenses you will bear, what expenses the mother will bear, what amount stands earmarked for the child, and that no further claims beyond those expressly recorded in the settlement shall be raised by either party in future. Such clarity at the settlement stage often prevents years of further litigation.
