TRAI Issuing Directions To Enforce Regulations Is Not 'Adjudication' Of Dispute, Does Not Usurp TDSAT's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Candidate Can Challenge Selection Process After Participating If Arbitrariness Is Writ Large Or Rules Changed Mid-Way: Supreme Court Selection Committee Cannot Superimpose Additional Cut-Off Marks Not Prescribed In Rules: Supreme Court Litigants Must Ordinarily Approach High Court First For Quashing FIRs, Article 32 Is For Exceptional Circumstances: Supreme Court Supreme Court Refuses To Club Multiple FIRs In Cyber Fraud Case, Says Similar Modus Operandi Does Not Constitute 'Same Transaction' Layman Borrowers Not Liable For Forgery If Even Bank's Legal Experts Failed To Detect Fabrication In Title Deeds: Allahabad High Court Kerala High Court Orders Travancore Devaswom Board To Digitise Sabarimala Asset Inventory, Says Current Records Resemble 'Betel Shop' Ledger Second Husband In Void Marriage Cannot Be Prosecuted For Dowry Death Under Section 80 BNS: Allahabad High Court Cohabitation Of Barely 3 Months Insufficient To Trigger Presumption Of Live-In Relationship For Maintenance: Bombay High Court SC/ST Act Case Filed By Suspended Head Constable To 'Wreck Vengeance' Against Investigating Officers Quashed: Andhra Pradesh High Court Non-Compliance With Order For Production Of Documents Under O.11 R.14 CPC Cannot Warrant Striking Off Defence: Calcutta High Court Omission To Put Dying Declaration To Accused Under Section 313 CrPC Makes It Inadmissible, But Doesn't Demolish Entire Prosecution Case: Delhi High Court Victim's Appeal Against Magistrate's Acquittal Order Lies Before Sessions Court Under Section 413 BNSS: Gujarat High Court 'Fraud And Justice Cannot Dwell Together': Karnataka High Court Quashes 30-Year-Old Land Acquisition After Records Of Compensation Go Missing Electricity Authorities Cannot Determine Civil Liability For Energy Theft Under Section 135; Only Special Court Empowered: Madhya Pradesh High Court State Cannot Exploit Employees By Keeping Them On Part-Time Basis For Decades To Deny Old Pension Scheme: Punjab & Haryana HC

Liability Of Husband Remain Same To Pay Maintenance Even Voluntarily Leaves Job: MP HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal precedent, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has delivered a crucial judgment reaffirming a husband’s liability to provide maintenance for his wife and child, even if he has voluntarily left his job. The ruling came in response to a revision petition filed by Sandeep Kumrawat against an order by the Family Court that had rejected his application for reducing the maintenance amount awarded to his wife and child.

The dispute arose from a matrimonial disagreement, and the court’s decision underscores the principles of maintenance law, emphasizing the obligation of husbands to support their families. The judgment highlights that maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code are enacted to protect women and children, preventing them from falling into destitution and vagrancy.

Sandeep Kumrawat contended that his wife, who is highly qualified, had suppressed her income, and he was willing to support her. However, the court held that the wife was entitled to maintenance as per her husband’s standard of living during their marriage, even if she possessed educational qualifications. The court discouraged a hyper-technical approach and stressed the importance of considering the wife’s means at the time of living with her husband.

Furthermore, the court noted that even if Sandeep Kumrawat had voluntarily left his job, he remained liable to provide maintenance for his wife and child. The judgment reinforces the principle that an able-bodied husband must demonstrate compelling reasons beyond his control to evade his legal obligation of maintaining his family.

The ruling also clarifies the scope of revisional power, asserting that the court should not interfere with maintenance orders unless they are manifestly perverse. In this case, the High Court upheld the Family Court’s order, which had reduced the maintenance amount based on proper appreciation of evidence.

This judgment serves as a significant legal benchmark, upholding the rights of women and children in maintenance disputes and reiterating the essential responsibility of husbands to provide financial support, irrespective of their employment status.

Date of Decision: 19 October, 2023

SANDEEP KUMRAWAT  VS SMT ANTIMA KUMRAWAT

Latest Legal News