Mother Taking Care Of Children Does A "Whole Time Job", Can't Be Said To Be Lazying Around: Karnataka High Court Enhances Maintenance

The Karnataka High Court has observed that taking care of the children, for a mother, is a whole time job and the husband cannot deny maintenance amount on the ground that she being qualified is not willing to work and earn money and wants to live on the maintenance that the husband pays.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by a woman questioning the order of the trial court granting a monthly maintenance amount under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to the tune of Rs 18,000 instead of Rs 36,000 sought by her.

The wife claimed that the husband is a Manager in Canara Bank, earns close to 90,000, as salary and the wife, though qualified and was working had to leave her job to take care of the children and therefore, she would need maintenance.

However, the husband claimed that he is in a "fluctuating job" and thus is not in a position to pay any amount beyond what is ordered by the family Court. He further contended that the wife was working as a lecturer earlier, she is qualified to work and therefore she cannot depend on maintenance.

The bench noted that respondent-husband is an employee at Canara Bank, a Government of India undertaking and is working in the cadre of Manager. "It is not a job that can be taken away like how pink slips are issued by private employers, who sometimes practise the role of hire and fire, nor is the petitioner bound by the principle of last come first go. He is in a job that offers security of tenure. The pay that he receives can never be reduced; it can only grow. Therefore, those submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent/husband are to be rejected as misleading and mischievous.”

Court also noted that on the birth of the first child the wife was asked to leave the job of to take care of the child. Then the second child was born and therefore, the wife completely quit employment only to take care of the children.

“Once the maintenance is sought, the husband now alleges that though the wife is qualified, she is not willing to work and earn money and wants to live on the maintenance that the husband pays. The wife-mother admittedly has quit the job to take care of the children and taking care of the children cannot be taking care of mere existence. It is shrouded by countless responsibilities and necessary expenditure from time to time. The wife, as a homemaker and mother, works indefatigably round the clock,” Court observed.

It added “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, as observed hereinabove, taking care of the children, for a mother, is a whole time job.”

Further it said “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. Such submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent-husband, are noted only to be rejected as, to say the least, they are preposterous.”

Appearance: Advocate B.R.Srinivasa Gowda for Petitioners

Advocate Anil R for Respondents

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 106

Case Title: ABC AND XYZ

Case No: Writ Petition No 14094 OF 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order