Dismissed¶56

Mr. Shankar Chowdhury v. Ms. Payal Bhowmick

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2025WP/36263/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim maintenance — Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Article 227 writ petition (GM-FC) — wife qualified and capable of earning but voluntarily unemployed since quitting job in 2021 — maintenance granted to wife until she obtains suitable employment — husband's income Rs.58,42,220/- per annum per IT returns AY 2024-25 — child's education, medical and other expenses during pendency — one-time litigation expenses Rs.25,000/- — Family Court Bengaluru order upheld — writ petition dismissed — party-in-person wife — NC: 2025:KHC:23900 — Lalitha Kanneganti J — decided 03.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

As per the husband's IT returns for assessment year 2024-25, his income is Rs.58,42,220/- per annum, i.e., approximately Rs.4,86,851/- per month. ¶42

Mr. Shankar Chowdhury Vs Ms. Payal Bhowmick — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶56

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 11.11.2024 passed on I.A.No.6 in M.C.No.6189/2021 by the Family Court, granting interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, ought to be set aside. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

Considering the financial position of the husband, the unemployment of the wife and the age and requirements of the 13-year-old child, the Family Court passed a reasoned order granting Rs.50,000/- per month maintenance; the High Court finds no reason to interfere.

¶49

Ratio / Principle

As per the husband's IT returns for assessment year 2024-25, his income is Rs.58,42,220/- per annum, i.e., approximately Rs.4,86,851/- per month.

¶42

Key takeaways

The wife is unemployed though capable of earning; she must look for a job and cannot depend on the husband forever, but until she obtains suitable employment the husband must maintain her, and the grant of maintenance to the wife until she gets a job was rightly made.ratio¶49
It is the responsibility of the husband to contribute for the needs of the child; as the mother is not working and the father is earning sufficiently, the Family Court rightly directed him to meet the child's entire education, medical and other expenses during pendency.ratio¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru (Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti) — Writ Petition (GM-FC) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the husband against the order dated 11.11.2024 on I.A.No.6 in M.C.No.6189/2021 (III Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru), granting the wife Rs.50,000/- per month interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 together with the child, directing the husband to bear the child's entire education, medical and other expenses during pendency, and Rs.25,000/- as one-time litigation expenses. The husband contended that the wife, though qualified and formerly earning about Rs.2,00,000/- per month, quit her job in 2021 without satisfactory explanation and should not be maintained. Held, dismissing the petition: the wife is presently unemployed and, until she secures suitable employment, the husband — earning Rs.58,42,220/- per annum as per IT returns for AY 2024-25 (about Rs.4,86,851/- per month) — must maintain her and the 13-year-old son, including the child's education and medical expenses; the Family Court's order was a reasoned order passed on consideration of the parties' financial position and there was no ground for interference. All pending I.As. in the writ petition were closed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 36263 OF 2024 (GM-FC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MR. SHANKAR CHOWDHURY S/O MR S.B.CHOWDHURY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O A-1103, SMR VINAY GALAXY, HOODI CIRCLE, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE-560 048

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. SONIA RAJESH, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

MS. PAYAL BHOWMICK W/O MR.SHANKAR CHOWDHURY, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O 401, PRISTINE PARADISE, ANUGRAHA LAYOUT, BILEKAHALLI, BANGALORE-560 076

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED: 11.11.2024 PASSED ON I.A.NO.6 IN M.C.NO.6189/2021 BY THE HON’BLE III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A AS ILLEGAL AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE I.A.NO.6 FILED THEREIN BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN UNDER SECTION 24 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 SEEKING INTERIM MAINTENANCE PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

¶17

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Aggrieved by the orders passed on I.A.No.6 in MC.No. 6189/2021 dated 11.11.2024 by the III Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, the husband is before this court.

¶24

The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.

¶25

The wife has appeared before this court as a party-inperson in this case. She has filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking a direction to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- per month as interim maintenance to herself and the child and Rs.50,000/- towards litigation expenses. The Family Court by the order impugned had granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- per month as maintenance to the wife and the child and directed to meet the entire education, medical and other expenses of the child during pendency of the proceedings from the date of application or till the respondent fetches suitable job, whichever is earlier. While passing the order, the Family Court has observed that as per bank statement produced by the wife, she was receiving the salary

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

till 02.12.2021. The petition is filed on 03.03.2023. As on that

¶29

day, the wife is unemployed and she has no independent source of income. But the fact is that she is well qualified and she is capable of getting suitable job and having ability to maintain herself is an undisputed fact. The records placed before the court shows that even before the service of notice to

¶30

the respondents she quit the job and failed to assign satisfactory explanation for quitting her job. The documents produced by the wife shows the fee structure of the school in which the son is studying. Since the wife is unemployed, the husband is bound to contribute for the maintenance of the wife

¶31

and the child, till she fetches the job. The husband is also bound to contribute for the medical, educational and other expenses of the child and also provide shelter for them. Even if

¶32

the wife fetches the job, even then the husband is bound to contribute proportionately for the maintenance, education, medical and other expenses of the child. There is nothing on record to hold that the wife quit her job to set her score against the husband. The husband is having sufficient income to contribute for the maintenance of his wife and the child to meet their needs and the husband is bound to accommodate the wife

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

and the child in the same standard of living in which he is leading his life. The family court also observed that the entire affidavit of assets and liabilities of the husband has to be taken into consideration to draw inference about the standard of his living. Under those circumstances, the family court had granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- as maintenance.

¶36

Learned counsel appearing for the husband submits that there is no dispute about the fact that wife was working till 2021 and also the material on record discloses the salary which she was earning, then why she is not doing the job from 2021 the court has also observed that no explanation is forthcoming.

¶37

It is submitted that as far as the child is concerned, the husband is ready to take care of him. But, as far as the wife is concerned, the husband need not support her when she is qualified and she is capable of getting a job. It is submitted that the wife had left the job just to claim the maintenance from the husband and it is submitted that the family court ought not to have granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- as maintenance and the order impugned needs to be set aside.

¶38

¶39

NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

The respondent/wife/party-in-person submits that because of the reason that she met with an accident, she had to quit the job and right from 2014, she is taking care of the child and there was no contribution from the husband at any point of time. It is submitted that earlier her father, who used to take care of her is no more now. Now, she has to depend upon her brother to take care of her necessities as well as necessities of the child and it is submitted that she is staying along with her brother in his resident. It is further submitted that the husband is earning sufficient income to maintain both the wife and the child. Further, the Family Court had only granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- and there are no grounds to interfere with well considered order passed by the Family Court.

¶42

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/father and the party-in-person/wife, perused the entire material on record. As per the documents produced by the husband and as per the IT returns for the assessment year 2024-25, his income is Rs.58,42,220/- per annum and per month it will come to Rs. 4,86,851/- per month. The annual

¶43

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

pay slip for the month of April 2024 to July 2024 reflects his annual income. There is also no dispute that till August 2021 the wife was earning and drawing salary of Rs.2,00,000/-and odd. It is the case of the wife that because of her health reasons and as she has to take cares of the child, she is not working and also with a gap she could not secure a job. It is the case of the husband that when she is capable of earning she should have secured the job and she should not depend upon the husband for her expenses. It is also an undisputed fact that the husband was never contributing anything to the child from the day they have separated.

¶46

The family court had rightly discussed and observed that the wife is capable of earning and she should get a job, but as of now, she is unemployed. The court has to look at the financial condition of the parties, income of husband and surrounding circumstances. Undoubtedly in this case, the father has stated that he is ready to take care of the child. As far as the mother is concerned, the Family Court has rightly observed that, the wife has to look for a job and forever she cannot depend upon the husband. The child is aged about 13 years, it

¶47

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

is not that she cannot do the job. Now the child is capable of taking care of himself in the absence of the mother and the court had rightly considered this aspect and granted maintenance to the wife until she gets a job. When it comes to the husband, it is the responsibility of the husband to contribute for the needs of the boy. If the mother is working, then they would be sharing the responsibility. But in this case, as the mother is not working and the father is working and earning sufficiently, Family Court had passed a reasoned order granting maintenance of an amount of Rs.50,000/- and directing the father to meet entire education, medical and other expenses during the pendency of the proceedings from the date of application or till the wife fetches suitable job whichever is earlier and also granted an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards the one time litigation expenses. Looking at the financial position of the husband and the wife being unemployed and the boy being 13 years of age, considering his educational and other requirements, the family court has passed a reasoned order and this court finds no reason to interfere.

¶50

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:23900 WP No. 36263 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

In the light of the above discussion, this court is passing

¶54

the following:

¶55

ORDER

¶56