Man Capable Of Earning Is Liable To Maintain Wife & Children Even If He Has Left His Job: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that it is well settled that if the husband is capable of earning, he would be liable for maintenance for his wife and children, even if he has left the job.

A bench of Justice Prem Narayan Singh also held that even if a wife has an M.Phil degree, she cannot be declined maintenance.

Our readers may note that this observation is in line with the recent opinion of the same bench wherein it was held that if a wife has a degree of higher education, it cannot be the basis of disentitling her to maintenance.

In its order, the Court also pointed out that a Husband cannot escape the liability of maintenance of the child and wife on the excuse that she has done some fault in her pleadings and proceedings of the case.

These observations were made by the bench while dismissing a revision plea filed against the Family Court's order rejecting Revisionist-Husband's application u/s 127 CrPC for a reduction in the maintenance amount of Rs.7,000/- (to respondent/wife) and Rs.3000/- (to son)

Essentially, it was contended by the counsel for the husband that the respondent/wife is highly qualified, has acquired a Master's Degree and is also serving in Bhartiya Mahavidyalaya, Ujjain. He also submitted that the revisionist husband is ready to keep the respondent with him and maintain her.

It was also argued that his wife had not come to the Court with clean hands and as such she had suppressed the fact that she was working as a teacher and drawing a handsome amount as salary and she could maintain herself.

It was also strongly argued before the bench that since he had left his job, he could not be held liable for maintaining his wife and children.

On the other hand, the counsel for the respondent submitted that the revisionist husband was earning Rs.7.00 lakhs per annum and hence, the respondent/wife is certainly entitled to a standard of living as of the petitioner.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the Court, at the outset, noted in a proceeding under Section 125 CrPC, that the Court doesn't need to ascertain who was in wrong and the minute details of the matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife need not be gone into.

In view of this, stressing that a destitute wife who is unable to maintain herself cannot be victimised only based on her fault, the Court remarked thus:

"The hyper-technical attitude cannot be adopted in such type of maintenance cases. As such the petitioner cannot escape the liability of maintenance of the child and wife on excuse that she has done some fault in her pleadings and proceedings of the case."

Further, the Court also noted that the respondent-wife had herself stated in her examination-in-chief that she was not working, she had no means of income, she had no means for the maintenance of her child and that she was dependent on her father and these statements had not been rebutted in her cross-examination.

In view of this, holding that even if she is having decree of M.Phil she cannot be declined for maintenance, the Court dismissed the revision plea as well as the prayer to remand the matter back to the Family Court.

Case title - SANDEEP KUMRAWAT vs. ANTIMA KUMRAWAT

Case Citation:

Click Here To Read/Download Order