The High Court dismissed the appeal against the Family Court order directing the appellant to pay interim maintenance. The Court held the appellant failed to prove the wife was employed, noting his termination occurred after the lower court order.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. The appellant is directed to comply with the Family Court order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Judgment Reserved on : 31.07.2020 Pronounced on : 18.08.2020
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3681 of 2019
--P. Dinesh Babu .. Appellant/ Petitioner / Respondent
Versus
D.J. Swathi ... Respondent/ Respondent/ Petitioner
Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Court Act against the Order dated 03.08.2019 passed in I.A. No. 6676 of 2018 in O.P. No. 4063 of 2018 on the file of V Additional Family Court at Chennai.
For Petitioner : Ms. D. Malarvizhi For Respondents : Mr. R. Abdul Mubeen
JUDGMENT
R. Subbiah, J
We have taken up the hearing of this appeal through Videoconferencing.
information technology firm and earning Rs.34,500/- per month. The request of the respondent to pay the entire salary amount after marriage to her mother was also generously accepted by the appellant. After the marriage, the appellant and respondent stayed in the parents house of the appellant at Thiruvarur cordially. As the appellant was employed in Qatar, after two months of marriage, he left India to Qatar. During 2017, the respondent accompanied the appellant to Qatar where they lived happily for five months. As the respondent became pregnant, she returned to Chennai and stayed with her mother and sister. During such stay in Chennai, the respondent never visited his parents hosue at Thiruvarur and continued to stay in her parents house. The respondent also demanded the appellant to resign his employment and come back to India, however, the appellant refused to quit his employment by citing his financial commitment including a home loan availed with Indian Bank to the tune of Rs.25 lakhs. On 29.05.2018, the respondent gave birth to a male child and the appellant came to see the child, but the appellant was not treated well by the respondent. According to the appellant, when he used the laptop of the respondent to book his return flight ticket to Qatar, he was shocked to see a video of the respondent dancing with her office staff in an inebriated condition in a tour arranged by her employer. When enquired by the appellant, the respondent shouted at the appellant and made it as if the appellant is suspecting her character. At the height of the quarrel, the respondent had shown the exit door to the appellant. Thereafter, the respondent abruptly stopped talking to the appellant over phone. On 18.07.2018, the appellant sent a legal notice calling upon the respondent to come and live with him within 15 days. The respondent, on receipt of the notice, called upon the appellant for a compromise. However, the respondent and her family members have lodged a false complaint against the appellant and his parents as if they have harassed the respondent demanding dowry. The appellant again sent another notice on 01.09.2018 calling upon the respondent to come and live with him. Inspite of receipt of the notice dated 01.09.2018, the respondent did not sent any reply notice. Therefore, the appellant has filed the Original Petition before the Family Court seeking dissolution of the marriage.
mother of the appellant want the appellant to listen to her dictates and the respondent was not permitted to say anything. It is also stated that now the respondent is not employed and she resigned her employment. The mother of the respondent is a house wife and there was no source of income for her to maintain herself and the minor male child. On the other hand, the appellant is employed in Qatar as a Project Engineer and earning Rs.2,50,000/- per month. Therefore, she prayed for appropriate direction to direct the appellant to pay Rs.50,000/- as maintenance to her and another sum of Rs.30,000/- to the minor male child per month as interim maintenance besides Rs.2,00,000/- as litigation expenses.
frequent leave availed by the appellant, he was subjected to disciplinary proceeding and eventually terminated from his employment on 10.06.2020. In this context, the learned counsel for the appellant relied on the affidavit filed by the appellant enclosing a letter dated 09.01.2020 of the employer of the appellant and the letter of termination dated 10.06.2020 to contend that the appellant is jobless and he has no wherewithal or resourceful enough to pay maintenance to the respondent and the minor children. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed for setting aside the order of the Family Court.
Petition for dissolution of the marriage. Pending the Original Petition, the respondent has filed an application under Section 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act seeking pendente lite maintenance for herself and the minor son. According to the respondent, earlier she was employed however, after marriage, the appellant and her parents forced her to resign her employment. It is also stated that the appellant is employed in Qatar and earning Rs.2,50,000/- as monthly salary. To fortify such submission, the respondent has filed Ex.P1, salary slip of the appellant. Admittedly, Ex.P1 has not been seriously disputed by the appellant. It is also stated that as on date, the respondent is jobless and she is not gainfully employed anywhere. She is staying with her widowed mother and the residence where she is residing along with her mother was the one taken for lease. In effect, it is the submission of the respondent in the application seeking interim maintenance that she is not gainfully employed, she has no resource to meet her basic livelihood as that of the minor child.
circumstances, the direction issued by the Family Court to the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent and the minor child cannot be interfered with.
12, In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal fails and it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, CMP No. 21076 of 2019 is closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rsh To The V Additional Judge, Family Court Chennai.
+1cc to Ms. D. Malarvizhi, Advocate SR.No. 27241 +1cc to Mr.K.Mohan , Advocate SR.No. 27183 CMA No. 3681 of 2019 A.SK(19.01.2021)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Family Court's order directing the appellant to pay interim maintenance to the respondent and minor child.
Whether the appellant fulfilled his burden to prove the respondent's employment status when he contested the Family Court's finding.
Whether the termination of the appellant's employment subsequent to the Family Court order is relevant for the disposal of the appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Deepak Jain vs. Charu JainRelied on¶24
(2007) 10 Supreme Court Cases 229
Shamina Farooqui vs. Shahid KhanRelied on¶24
(2015) 5 Supreme Court Cases 705
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P. Dinesh Babu
D.J. Swathi
R.Subbiah
C.Saravanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
R.Subbiah and C.Saravanan
Parties & counsel
