Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |     Punjab & Haryana HC Double Bench Upholds Protection for Married Partners in Live-In Relationships, Denies Same for Minors    |    

Husband’s Duty to Provide Maintenance Irrespective of Income: Allahabad High Court Upholds Maintenance Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling that reaffirms the responsibility of a husband to provide maintenance to his wife, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging an order of maintenance granted by the Family Court. The case, titled Kamal vs. State Of U.P, was presided over by Hon’ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J.

The revisionist, Kamal, had contested the Family Court's decision which directed him to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 2,000 to his wife. The revisionist’s argument hinged on the claim that his wife was self-sufficient and living in adultery. However, the court found these claims unsubstantiated.

In her judgment, Hon’ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J., emphasized the husband’s duty to maintain his wife, stating, “For the sake of argument, if the court presumed that the revisionist has no income from his job or from rent of Maruti Van, even then the revisionist is duty-bound to provide maintenance to his wife.” This statement highlights the court’s stance on the fundamental responsibility of a husband towards his wife’s maintenance, irrespective of his income or her alleged earning capacity.

The court noted the lack of documentary evidence regarding the wife’s alleged income and the revisionist’s illness. It was also observed that the revisionist, being the only son, had agricultural income from land in his father’s name. Hon’ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J., pointed out, “It is also evident from the record that the revisionist is a healthy man and is capable of earning money and is liable to maintain his wife.”

Rejecting the claim of adultery due to a lack of evidence, the court upheld the Family Court’s order, deeming the amount of Rs. 2,000 per month as a ‘meager amount’ considering the liabilities and assets of the revisionist.

The judgment concluded with the dismissal of the revision petition and an upholding of the Family Court’s decision dated February 21, 2023. The court also ordered the trial court to take coercive action against the revisionist for the recovery of maintenance.

Date of Decision: 25.01.2024

Kamal VS State Of U.P 

 

Similar News