Husband Taking 'Academic Break' Doesn't Extinguish His Duty To Maintain Wife And Children: Madras High Court

Update: 2023-09-19 12:41 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

While refusing to interfere with an order of maintenance made by the Family Court, the Madras High Court has observed that a husband is liable to pay maintenance to his wife and child even if he is on an academic break to pursue a Ph.D. “The amount awarded in our opinion would be just about sufficient for sustainance of one human being at the cost of living today. Merely...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

While refusing to interfere with an order of maintenance made by the Family Court, the Madras High Court has observed that a husband is liable to pay maintenance to his wife and child even if he is on an academic break to pursue a Ph.D.

The amount awarded in our opinion would be just about sufficient for sustainance of one human being at the cost of living today. Merely because the petitioner has taken a study holiday or an Academic break, his duty to maintain his wife and child cannot take the back seat,” the court observed.

The Court was hearing an appeal challenging an order of interim maintenance directing the husband to Rs. 25,000 to his wife and minor daughter.

Though the wife had sought an interim maintenance of Rs.1,00,000 each per month for herself and her minor daughter, the husband resisted the application and contended that he had taken a break from his job to pursue a Ph.D and was taking up part-time employment which paid him Rs. 20,000 per month.

The wife however produced details of business carried on by the husband and details of his agricultural hoardings. Based on these documents, the Family Court had directed him to pay maintenance.

On appeal, though a submission was made that the order of maintenance by the Family Court was on a higher side, the court rejected this contention and instead observed that the amount was just sufficient for the sustenance of a person at the cost of living that existed in the present day.

Thus, finding no ground to interfere with the order of the family court, the court dismissed the appeal. However, since a submission was made by the husband that there were talks for settlement and a mediation would benefit the parties, the court directed the Family Court to refer the matter for mediation.

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr.Suchit Anant Palande

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 273

Case Title: SV v. MR

Case No: CMA No. 2118 of 2023

Click here to read/download the judgment

Tags:    

Similar News