“Classic Example Of Kalyug”: P&H High Court Slams Son For Plea Challenging ₹5K Maintenance Awarded To Mother, Imposes ₹50K Costs

Observing that it is a classic "example of Kalyug" which has "shaken the conscience" of the Court, Punjab & Haryana High Court imposed a cost of Rs.50,000 on a son who challenged the order to pay Rs.5000 to his mother as maintenance amount.

Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri said, "It actually shocks the conscience of this Court whereby the son has chosen to file the present petition against his own mother challenging fixation of maintenance of Rs.5,000/- although he succeeded the property of his father and the old age mother of 77 years does not have any source of income and has been living with her daughter who is married and is staying in her matrimonial home."

The Court further added that, "It is a classic example of Kalyug which is reflected from the present case which has shaken the conscience of by this Court. There is no illegality in the order passed by learned Principal Judge, Family court, and rather it will not be out of place to mention that even the amount of Rs.5,000/- was on the lower side.."

It noted that the mother was a widow, was living with her married daughter and the petitioner-her son assailed the maintenance order on the ground that way back in the year 1993 an amount of Rs.1 lakh was paid to his mother for maintenance as past, present and future maintenance.

The Court was hearing a revision plea filed by a son against his 77 years old mother, challenging the order passed by the Principal Judge Family Court, Sangrur whereby in the petition under Section 125 CrPC, an amount of Rs. 5,000 was awarded as maintenance.

A petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C was filed by the respondent-widow against two persons, firstly the present petitioner being son and secondly widow of her second son.

The Family Court on the basis of the pleadings and documents came to the conclusion that the respondent-widow had no source of income and she is living with her daughter.

It was also observed that the petitioner and the daughter-in-law  neglected to maintain her. Rather, the other respondent-wife of the pre-deceased did not choose to appear before the Family Court and was proceeded against ex-parte.

The Family Court allowed the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C and fixed the payment of maintenance of Rs.5,000 per month each i.e. to the petitioner son and the widow of the pre-deceased son along with litigation expenses of Rs.5,000.

Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the father of the petitioner passed away in 1992 and the petitioner inherited the property an agreement was executed between the parties in the year 1993 whereby an amount of Rs.1 lac was given as maintenance to the respondent for her past, present and future maintenance and thereafter she left the house and started living with her daughter and submitted that the petitioner had therefore already maintained her mother and is still maintaining her but she is now living with her daughter and not with the petitioner.

Therefore the amount of maintenance which was imposed by the Family Court was erroneous and is liable to be set aside, especially in view of the fact that an amount of Rs.1 lakh has already been paid and she is residing with her daughter and not with the petitioner, he added.

After hearing the submissions, the Court observed that, "it is an unfortunate case where a son has preferred the present revision petition against his mother who is now of the age of 77 years. As the facts of the case reveal it becomes more shocking. One Bhag Singh had 50 Bighas of land whose widow is the present respondent namely Surjit Kaur who is of the age of 77 years now."

The Court noted that after the death of respondent's husband the property was succeeded by the the petitioner-son to the extent of half of the share and the remaining property was devolved in the name of two sons of the pre-deceased son and the respondent-widow is neither in the cultivating possession of any land nor is she the owner.

It noted that since her son and the widow of the pre- deceased son were not maintaining her and were neglecting her, she was compelled to live with her daughter.

"Once it has come on the record that the respondent- widow did not have any source of income and she is mother of the petitioner and their relationship is not in dispute, then there was no ground available with the petitioner who is the son to have even preferred a civil revision wherein the scope of revision petition is very limited," added the Court.

While dismissing the plea, the Court said, "the present petition is hereby dismissed with costs. The costs are assessed as Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand). The petitioner...is hereby directed to pay the costs of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand) by depositing a Demand Draft in the name of the respondent before learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sangrur within a period of three months from today."

On his depositing the same before the aforesaid Family Court, the Court thereafter shall deliver the Demand Draft to the respondent through a special messenger forthwith, it added.

Ms. Neha, Advocate for Mr. S. S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vishal Satija, Advocate for the respondent.

Title: XXXX v. XXXX

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 99