Dismissed¶7

M.Manjunatha Habeeb Basha v. B.Shahin

Madras HC10 Mar 2025CRL RC/1706/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Crl.RC.No.1706 of 2023; High Court of Judicature at Madras; Justice P. Velmurugan; decided 10.03.2025; maintenance; wife and minor child; Family Court Chengalpet; F.C.M.C. No.33 of 2021; Sections 397 & 401 Cr.P.C.; revision dismissed; no perversity; quantum meagre; husband's bounden duty to maintain wife and child; no proof of disability, income or employment; arrears deposit within three months; coercive steps for execution.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; revision dismissed. Petitioner directed to deposit the entire arrears of maintenance within three months, failing which the Judge, Family Court, Chengalpet, is to take coercive steps to execute the maintenance order. ¶7

M.Manjunatha Habeeb Basha Vs B.Shahin — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the Family Court's maintenance order directing Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and minor son suffered from perversity such as to warrant interference in this criminal revision seeking to set it aside. +1 more

¶prayer

Court's answer

This Court does not find any perversity in the maintenance order passed by the Family Court.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

There is no reason to interfere with the Family Court's order and there is no merit in this revision.

¶6

Key takeaways

Though claiming to work on a temporary basis, the petitioner filed no proof of his income or employment and admitted having family property; his plea of disability or inability to work was likewise unsupported, so his contention of inability to pay failed.ratio¶5
It is the bounden duty of the husband to maintain his wife and child.ratio¶6
Considering the status and economic condition prevailing as on date, the maintenance order and the quantum fixed by the Family Court are meagre.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (P. Velmurugan, J.) dismissed a criminal revision under Sections 397 & 401 Cr.P.C. against a Family Court, Chengalpet maintenance order (F.C.M.C. No.33 of 2021, dated 27.04.2023) directing payment of Rs.5,000/- per month to the petitioner's wife and minor son. The petitioner's pleas of unemployment (daily wages of Rs.6,778/-) and the 1st respondent's alleged employment found no favour: he filed no proof of disability, inability to work, income or employment, and admitted owning family property. Holding it the husband's bounden duty to maintain his wife and child, and that the awarded quantum was meagre considering the prevailing status and economic condition, the Court found no perversity in the Family Court's order and no merit in the revision, dismissed it, and directed deposit of the entire arrears within three months, failing which coercive execution was authorised.

¶1

Crl.RC.No.1706 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 10.03.2025

¶4

Coram:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

Crl.RC.No.1706 of 2023

¶7

M.Manjunatha Habeeb Basha ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

B.Shahin 2. H.Mohammed Arshad (Minor) S/o.M.Manjunathan Habeeb Basha Rep. by his mother and natural guardian of

¶10

1st respondent ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the maintenance order passed in F.C.M.C. No.33 of 2021 on the file of the Family Court, Chengalpet, dated 27.04.2023 directing the petitioner to pay the maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the respondents.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C.K.M.Appaji For Respondents : Mrs.P.Meenakshi

¶13

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

¶14

1/6

¶15

Crl.RC.No.1706 of 2023

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner to set aside

¶18

the maintenance order passed in F.C.M.C. No.33 of 2021 on the file of the Family Court, Chengalpet, dated 27.04.2023 directing the petitioner to pay the maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the respondents.

¶19

The case of the petitioner is that the respondents are his wife and minor son. Due to matrimonial dispute, the 1st respondent left the matrimonial home along with the 2nd respondent/child and thereafter, filed a maintenance case against the petitioner in F.C.M.C. No.33 of 2021 before the Family Court, Chengalpet. The learned Judge, Family Court allowed the said petition directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month towards maintenance to the respondents. Challenging the same, the present revision is filed.

¶20

Heard and perused the materials available on record.

¶21

2/6

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.RC.No.1706 of 2023 4. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent is a working and

¶24

earning woman and she is also a graduate and at the time of filing the maintenance petition, the petitioner was unemployed and he was not earning. Thereafter, the petitioner was given only daily wages of Rs.6,778/-, whereas, the learned Judge, Family Court ordered maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to the respondents. According to the respondents, the 1st respondent is unemployed

¶25

and not earning money and residing in her parental house along with the minor

¶26

child but the petitioner is working as a Clerk in Kovoor Panchyat Union.

¶27

The petitioner has not filed any proof to show that he is a disabled

¶28

person or he is unable to go for any work. Though the petitioner has stated that

¶29

he is working on temporary basis, he has not filed any proof to show his income and employment. However, the petitioner admitted that he is having family property. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances, the Magistrate ordered only Rs.5,000/- to both the wife and child.

¶30