Victim’s Testimony Must Be of Sterling Quality to Be Sole Basis of Conviction: Kerala High Court Reduces Sentence of Pastor Convicted for Repeated Rape of Minor Providing Set-Top Boxes to Subscribers Constitutes Sale”: Karnataka High Court Upholds VAT on Tata Play Limited Mere Registration of FIR Cannot Justify Denial of Passport Renewal: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court A Will Must Be Proved as Per Law, Even If Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Trial Court Decree Justice Must Not Be Sacrificed at the Altar of Expediency: Punjab & Haryana High Court Partially Allows CBI’s Plea to Summon Crucial Witnesses in High-Profile Bribery Case Victim Must Be Heard Before Granting Bail Under SC/ST Act: Rajasthan High Court Directs Police to Ensure Proper Notification A Party Cannot Approve and Disapprove the Same Claim in a Legal Proceeding: Orissa High Court Suspicion of Tax Evasion Justifies GST Confiscation Proceedings: Madras High Court Rejects Mukti Gold's Challenge Custodial Interrogation Not Necessary When Accused Cooperates; Personal Liberty Must Be Protected: Kerala High Court Directors Are Not Personal Guarantors of Company Debt: Delhi High Court Dismisses Suit Against Company Directors Mere Relationship with the Deceased Does Not Render a Witness Unreliable: Calcutta High Court Affirms Life Sentence for Brutal Murder Once a Property is Attached, Any Subsequent Sale is Legally Void Against the Decree-Holder: Andhra High Court Upholds Creditor’s Rights A Necessary Party Must Be Present for Complete Adjudication: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Rent Controller’s Order No Interest on Delayed Gratuity If Employee Had Outstanding Dues: Orissa High Court Dismisses Claim Pension is a Right, Not a Charity: Supreme Court Slams West Bengal Government for Denying Benefits Without Inquiry Land Cannot Be Reserved Indefinitely Without Acquisition: Supreme Court Strikes Down 33-Year-Old Reservation in Maharashtra Failure to Disclose Every Policy Is Not a Fraud: Supreme Court Orders Insurance Payout in Favor of Policyholder's Son Judicial Decisions Are Not Immune from Disciplinary Proceedings:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Allows Inquiry Against Judicial Officer

Responsibility to Maintain Wife and Minor Daughter Irrespective of Employment Status: High Court of Karnataka Upholds Interim Maintenance Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court affirms Family Court’s interim maintenance order, highlighting economic realities and familial obligations.

In a significant judgment, the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, dismissed a writ petition challenging an interim maintenance order issued by the Family Court, Belagavi. The court upheld the Family Court’s directive mandating the petitioner, Shri Amit S/o Shankarrao Chougule, to pay monthly maintenance to his estranged wife and minor daughter.

In the case titled Shri Amit S/o Shankarrao Chougule v. Smt. Megha W/o Amit Chougule & Anr., the petitioner contested the interim maintenance order on the grounds of his unemployment and lack of independent income. The Family Court had ordered Shri Amit to pay Rs. 7,000 per month to his wife and Rs. 3,000 per month to his minor daughter, despite his claims of financial incapacity.

Responsibility to Maintain Family: The High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, emphasized the inherent responsibility of a husband and father to maintain his wife and children, irrespective of his employment status. The court remarked, "The petitioner under the garb that he has lost his employment, cannot shy away from his responsibility of maintaining the wife and minor daughter."

Economic Realities and Maintenance Amount: The court considered the prevailing economic conditions, including inflation and the rising cost of living. Justice Magadum noted, "In the present day, we are all burdened with the plaguing effects of inflation. The cost of living has also significantly risen owing to the same." He further acknowledged that the awarded maintenance must cover the wife’s living expenses as well as the costs associated with ongoing litigation.

The court affirmed the Family Court’s discretion in determining a reasonable maintenance amount, factoring in the petitioner’s family's ownership of a commercial complex. It concluded that the maintenance sums of Rs. 7,000 for the wife and Rs. 3,000 for the minor daughter were not exorbitant but rather necessary to ensure their sustenance and participation in legal proceedings.

Justice Magadum remarked, "Interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 7,000/- per month to the wife and Rs. 3,000/- per month to the minor daughter is not exorbitant. Bearing in mind these factors and also giving due consideration to the cost of living in Belagavi city, the Family Court has rightly exercised its discretion."

The dismissal of the writ petition reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the financial responsibilities of estranged spouses towards their families, despite personal financial hardships. The judgment underscores the importance of considering economic realities in maintenance cases and sets a precedent for similar future disputes.

This landmark decision affirms that claims of financial incapacity cannot exempt individuals from their familial obligations, particularly in the context of rising living costs and the economic pressures faced by separated spouses.

 

Date of Decision: 27th May 2024

Shri Amit S/o Shankarrao Chougule v. Smt. Megha W/o Amit Chougule & Anr.

 

Similar News