Husband’s Duty To Maintain Wife & Child After She Quit Job At His Insistence: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that it is a husband’s duty to maintain wife and child when the wife quit her job to take care of the child at the insistence of the husband.
The Court upheld the dismissal of a petition filed by a husband seeking to challenge orders related to the payment of interim maintenance. The Bench clarified that the payment of the child’s school fees by the husband does not mean that he will not pay for the child’s maintenance.
A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed, “The wife has quit the job, to take care of the child at the insistence of the husband, it is the duty of the husband to maintain the wife and the child and not to wash of his hands from the responsibility of maintenance. The payment of the fees, paid that is by the petitioner, would not mean that the husband would not pay maintenance for the child, for living. Payment of the fees is all together different responsibility apart from the husband paying maintenance to maintain a child and the wife.”
Advocate S.G. Rajendra Reddy appeared for the petitioner, while Advocate D.P. Mahesh represented the respondents.
The trial court had directed the husband to pay interim maintenance to his wife and their five-year-old daughter.
The wife had initiated legal proceedings under Section 498A of the IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act). In response to these proceedings, the wife sought interim maintenance for herself and their child, which the courts granted.
The husband argued that the order to pay maintenance with a monthly income as an Assistant Professor was onerous. He further submitted that he had paid the entire school fee of the child from the year 2022 onwards. He further contended that his wife was previously employed at Infosys and should not require maintenance.
The High Court rejected the husband’s submission that the husband was only earning a certain amount and therefore was not in a position to pay maintenance.
“Payment of the fees is all together different responsibility apart from the husband paying maintenance to maintain a child and the wife,” the Court remarked.
The Bench noted that the husband was in “gross default in payment of maintenance” and clarified that irrespective of whether the wife was in employment, the husband had been directed to pay interim maintenance.
Accordingly, the High Court rejected the petition.
Cause Title: C v. N & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC:30117)
