George Coram & another Appeal by Mithilesh Kumar against an order awarding interim maintenance. The monies to be awarded to the wife was dismissed by the Patna High Court. The Court held that the working wife is entitled to maintenance and found no perversity in the Family Court's factual findings warranting interference under Article 227.
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 PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1611 of 2018
======================================================
Mithilesh Kumar S/o Late Brijnandan Prasad Vill.- Rahimchak, P.s.- Giriyak (O.P. Pawapuri), Distt.- Nalanda at present posted as Group D Employee at Buxar Lanapur, Railway Division, Danapur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vikram Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 25.05.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Biharsharif, Nalanda in Maintenance Case No. 1(M) of 2015 whereby he has directed the petitioner to pay ad interim maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month to the respondent no.1 from the date of the order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent no.1 is herself employed and is getting handsome salary and as such, she is not entitled to any maintenance from
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1611 of 2018(2) dt.26-09-2019 2/2
her husband.
It is an admitted position that the respondent no.1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner, who is a Group-D employee in Indian Railway. It is also admitted that respondent no.1 is having a child in her lap. By now, it is well settled that a husband can be held liable to pay maintenance for children irrespective of his wife earning. Furthermore, the idea that a working woman is not entitled to claim maintenance is also misconceived. The order awarding an interim maintenance allowance of Rs.3,500/- per month to the respondent is neither arbitrary nor excessive.
The conclusions arrived at by the Family Court while passing the impugned order are essentially factual and are not perverse. That being so, there is no scope for interference in the present application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The application is dismissed.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Pradeep/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 to set aside the Family Court's order directing interim maintenance given the wife's employment status.
Mithilesh Kumar
Kumari Pinki Sinha
Fruti Kumari
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
