Dismissed

Sathish M v. Punithavathi

Madras HC7 Aug 2024CRP/3146/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband challenged interim maintenance of Rs.3,000 per month awarded to wife in his divorce petition. Court held husband must maintain wife despite her earning capacity, adultery allegation to be decided at trial, and dismissed the revision as the amount was neither excessive nor arbitrary.

What did the court decide?

None granted to petitioner; revision dismissed with no costs, interim maintenance of Rs.3,000/month upheld.

Sathish M Vs Punithavathi — Maintenance and Alimony | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P. (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.08.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

Civil Revision Petition (PD) No.3146 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.16804 of 2024

¶7

Sathish

¶8

.. Appellant/Respondent/Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

Punithavathi .. Respondent/Petitioner/Respondent

¶11

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the judgment and decree in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in H.M.O.P.No.121 of 2022 passed by the Family Judge, Family Court at Perambalur, by order dated 23.08.2023.

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr.E.Balamurugan

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This Civil Revision Petition challenges the order of the learned

¶15

Family Judge, Family Court, Perambalur in I.A.No.3 of 2023 in H.M.O.P.No.121 of 2022 dated 23.08.2023.

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

C.R.P. (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶19

There is no dispute in the relationship between the petitioner and

¶20

the respondent. The petitioner is the husband and the respondent is the wife. They married each other on 02.07.2010. From the wedlock, two children were born. The husband asserts that the children are in his custody. The wife would state that on account of abuse by the husband, she left the matrimonial home and is residing separately.

¶21

The husband, taking note of the fact that his wife had separated

¶22

from him, filed H.M.O.P.No.121 of 2022, invoking the provisions of 13 (1), (1-a) and (1-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶23

On being served with summons, the wife took out an application

¶24

for grant of interim maintenance. She pleaded that the husband is earning around Rs.30,000/- per month and that she is unable to maintain herself. She would state that the husband is getting sumptuous salary from a private firm, in which he is working. Therefore, she requested the Court to fix the monthly maintenance as Rs.10,000/- per month.

¶25

Page 2 of 6

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

C.R.P. (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶28

The respondent filed a prolix counter running to several pages

¶29

stating that he has studied till 7^th standard only, whereas, the wife holds Diploma in Nursing. Therefore, he would plead that since the wife is capable of earning, he is not liable to maintain her.

¶30

During the course of the proceedings, neither the petitioner nor the

¶31

respondent decided to grace the witness box. The learned Judge on the basis of the available evidence passed an order, directing the Civil Revision Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the respondent/wife. Against which, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

¶32

Heard, Mr.E.Bala Murugan, Counsel for the Civil Revision

¶33

Petitioner.

¶34

Mr.E.Bala Murugan, would urge that the husband is suffering from back pain and is spending considerable amount towards his health. He would state that the children are in his custody and he is the one taking care of them. He would further state that the wife left the matrimonial home only

¶35

Page 3 of 6

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

C.R.P. (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶38

because, she had developed an illicit relationship with a third party. He would plead that the wife is not entitled to any interim maintenance, because of her conduct.

¶39

I have carefully considered the submissions made on either side.

¶40

Relationship between the parties being admitted, it is the duty of the husband to maintain the wife. The fact that the wife is capable of earning does not mean the husband can shirk his responsibility. The husband has not let in any evidence before the Trial Court, in order to substantiate his plea that he is suffering from illness and has to spend money to take care of his health.

¶41

On the contrary, the wife has specifically pleaded that she is unemployed and not in a position to take care of her financial needs. Whether she is committing adultery or not, is a matter which has to be gone into only at the time of final disposal. In order to survive till the end of the litigation, the wife would have to be maintained. All that the Court has ordered is Rs.100/per day only, that is neither excessive nor arbitrary, therefore, it requires no

¶42

Page 4 of 6

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

C.R.P. (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶45

interference.

¶46

In view of the above discussion, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶47

07.08.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet:Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No Jer

¶48

To The Family Judge Family Court, Perambalur.

¶49

Page 5 of 6

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

C.R.P. (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶52

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.,

¶53

Jer

¶54

Civil Revision Petition (PD) No.3146 of 2024

¶55

07.08.2024

¶56

Page 6 of 6

¶57

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Sathish M v. Punithavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathish M v. Punithavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Selvam (Died) 1. S.Vasantha Vs S.Balakrishnan

Selvarasu Vs Thirungnam

Vaishnavi Vs G. Balaji

P. Gopalakrishnan Vs P. Subramanian

Vijaya Babu Vs Gunasundari @ Divya

K.Kumar Vs R.Deivamalar