Sunday, April 14, 2024

Husband bound to take care of wife, children both in law and religion: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a man seeking reduction in maintenance amount payable by him to his wife and daughter on the grounds that it was the duty of a husband to take care of his wife and children both in law and religion.

The order was passed by the single-judge Bench of Justice Krishna S. Dixit on a petition filed by a Hindu man challenging a family court order, which directed him to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs 3,000 to his wife and Rs 2,500 to each for his two daughters as an interim measure in the pending case.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner-husband contended that the decision to set the monthly maintenance amount at Rs 8,000 was unjustifiable, considering the husband’s limited income and his wife’s alleged behaviour.

He further submitted that the husband had a responsibility to support his elderly parents, who were living in a rented home.

While rejecting the arguments, the single-judge Bench observed that a sum of Rs 8,000 per month was barely enough in today’s day and age.

It noted that a sum of Rs 8,000 as collective maintenance for the wife and two minor school going daughters was apparently too meagre a sum, to hold the body and soul together.

The High Court took in view the fact that neither the marriage between the parties nor the birth of the children out of wedlock was in dispute.

It said the husband had not given sufficient details on how far he had to support his elderly parents, considering that he admitted that his father received pension payments.

Rejecting the petition, the Bench said had the petitioner given full particulars of the monthly pension being earned by his father, the court could have adjudged its sufficiency for the parents.

The petitioner has also not stated as to there being brothers or sisters. No explanation has benn forthcoming that would otherwise entitle him to secure an order at the hands of this court for setting aside the impugned award of maintenance, it added.

The petitioner was represented by Advocate Srinivasan S.K.


News Update