Karnataka High Court Grants Visitation Rights To Father, Rejects Wife's Plea Over Non-Payment Of Maintenance Amount To Her

The Karnataka High Court has allowed a man to meet his 4-year-old child, while rejecting his estranged wife's argument that visitation should be barred due to the non-payment of maintenance amounts due towards her.

Justice Rajeshwari N. Hegde was hearing a petition filed by the wife challenging a trial court order that had allowed the husband to meet the child twice a month alongside a 10-minute video call from Monday to Friday.

The wife had argued that the husband cannot seek visitation right as he unilaterally bifurcated the maintenance amount of Rs 60,000 and paid only Rs 25,000 toward the child while leaving her portion unpaid.

On the other hand, the husband in his affidavit submitted that he had paid the maintenance due towards the child up to date. Further, he relied on the Orissa High Court ruling in Manjusha Singhania vs. Nimish Singhania (2019), wherein it was held, “There is allegation by the wife against the husband that she has not been paid with maintenance and thereby, visitation right should not have been granted to the husband, however, such contention is insignificant because the visitation right of the child is considered on a different pedestal of welfare of the child which is paramount in considering the application for visitation right.”

Considering the facts and arguments advanced by the counsel of both the parties, Justice Hegde observed,

“this Court is of the considered view that, the respondent-husband, being the father of the child, cannot be denied an opportunity to maintain a relationship with his child. The respondent has also filed an affidavit stating that he has paid the maintenance due towards the child up to date. In the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the respondent is entitled to visitation rights in respect of the child.”

Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petition by modifying the trial court's order. The Court allowed the father to meet the child for up to three days a month on weekends or public holidays, participate in school events, and spend 10 days during the summer vacation, while withdrawing the permission to video call the child daily.

Background

The matrimonial dispute dates back to 2020, when the petitioner-wife filed a petition seeking dissolution of her marriage with the respondent-husband under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The couple, who married in December 2017, have a daughter born in January 2019.

During the pendency of the divorce proceedings, the wife was awarded maintenance of Rs 60,000 per month for herself and the child. The Trial Court also allowed the husband bi-monthly physical visits, daily video calls, and birthday/school access to the minor child. The wife challenged the visitation order, arguing that the video calls interrupted with the child's studies and that the husband had not paid the maintenance of Rs 60,000.