MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

"Karnataka High Court Upholds Homemaker's Right to Maintenance, Recognizes Childcare as Full-Time Responsibility"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Karnataka High Court has underscored the significance of a homemaker's role in raising children, affirming that "taking care of children is a full-time job." The court granted a monthly maintenance of ₹36,000 to a mother, who had quit her job to take care of her children.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the case, allowed the writ petition filed by Smt. Shylaja S. R and others against Sri Hareesha A, modifying a previous order by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal. The earlier order had granted only half of the claimed maintenance amount.

In the judgment (Writ Petition No. 14094 of 2023), the court highlighted the mother's sacrifices, noting, "It is not in dispute that on the birth of the first child, the wife was asked to leave the job of a Teacher to take care of the child." The court emphasized the importance of a mother's role, saying, "The wife, as a homemaker and mother, works indefatigably round the clock."

The case revolved around the claim of interim maintenance by the petitioner, who had sought financial support for herself and her two children following the deterioration of her marriage. Her husband, a manager in Canara Bank with a salary close to ₹90,000, opposed the claim, suggesting that his wife, being qualified, should work and earn rather than depend on maintenance.

Rejecting this contention, the court observed, "The respondent being the husband, cannot be seen to contend that the wife is lazing around and not earning money to take care of the children." Justice Nagaprasanna cited various precedents, including the Apex Court's judgments, to emphasize that maintenance must enable the wife and children to continue living as they did before the marital discord.

This decision is seen as a significant acknowledgment of the non-economic contributions of homemakers in a marriage and their entitlement to financial support in cases of marital discord. The judgment serves as a reminder of the legal system's recognition of the intrinsic value of homemaking and childcare, roles often undervalued in monetary terms.

Date of Decision: 28-02-2024

SMT. SHYLAJA S. R AND OTHERS Vs. SRI HAREESHA A

 

Latest Legal News