Maintenance Dispute | 'Matru Devo Bhava': Allahabad HC Directs Daughter To Pay 25% Of Hospitalised Mother's Medical Bills
The Allahabad High Court recently directed a daughter, who expressed her willingness to settle a maintenance dispute with her mother, to pay at least 25% of the current outstanding medical expenses for her mother, who is currently hospitalized. Referring to a Doha of Rahim and the teachings of the Taittiriya Upanishad, a bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery...
The Allahabad High Court recently directed a daughter, who expressed her willingness to settle a maintenance dispute with her mother, to pay at least 25% of the current outstanding medical expenses for her mother, who is currently hospitalized.
Referring to a Doha of Rahim and the teachings of the Taittiriya Upanishad, a bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed thus:
“मातृ देवो भवः' (माता देव यानि भगवान के समान है) और 'क्षमा बड़न को चाहिये, छोटन को उत्पात।' (बड़ों को क्षमा शोभा देती है और छोटों को उत्पात (बदमाशी)। अर्थात् अगर छोटे बदमाशी करें कोई बड़ी बात नहीं और बड़ों को इस बात पर क्षमा कर देना चाहिए।)” ['Matru Devo Bhava' (Mother is equal to God) and 'Kshama Badan ko Chahiye, chotan ko utpat, mischief of the younger.' (Forgiveness suits the elderly and mischief suits the younger ones. That is if the younger ones misbehave, it is not a big deal and the elders should forgive them for this.]
The Court made these observations while dealing with a plea moved by a daughter under Section 482 CrPC challenging an order of the family court directing her to pay Rs. 8,000/- per month towards maintenance to her mother.
The mother had earlier filed a Section 125 CrPC application before the family court seeking maintenance from her daughter/applicant, the same was allowed ex-parte.
The applicant-daughter filed a recall application regarding the ex-parte maintenance order, arguing that her mother has four other daughters who have also been allotted shares in her properties.
The applicant contended that she had been neglected and that, when it came to seeking maintenance, her mother sought support only from her and not from her other daughters, which was unjustified.
The recall application was also rejected, and thus, challenging both orders, she moved to the High Court. Her counsel did not argue on merits and apprised the Court that the parties were willing to settle the matter among themselves.
The Court was also informed that the applicant will visit her mother at the hospital where she is presently admitted and that she will try to meet her as a mother and not as an opponent.
In view of this, expressing a hope that the matter would be settled amicably, the Court directed the applicant to discharge her part of the responsibility towards her mother and pay at least 25% of the outstanding amount of medical expenses incurred on her hospitalised mother.
Advocate Prem Sagar Verma appeared for the applicant/daughter
Advocate Brij Raj represented the mother.
Case title - Sangeeta Kumari vs. State of U.P. and Another