Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose out of a petition under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 filed by a son against his father seeking maintenance and education expenses. The Family Court, Nagpur, in Petition No. C-55 of 2015, awarded maintenance of ₹5,000 per month from 27.10.2015. Both parties appealed, with the son seeking enhancement and the father seeking reduction. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, heard both appeals together. The parents married on 25.06.2000 and the son was born in 2001, but the parents lived separately even before the son's birth. The mother lodged a complaint at Katol Police Station under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, and the marriage was dissolved by divorce decree on 21.07.2009. The son resided with his mother, an Assistant Teacher, who bore his education and daily expenses. The father, also an Assistant Teacher with a monthly salary of about ₹45,000, did not maintain the son. During the proceedings, the son attained majority and was studying in the third year of IIT Dhanbad after securing 93% marks in the 10th standard and clearing the IIT entrance examination. The father did not deny his liability but contended that the mother had denied him access to the son and filed a false complaint, and that he had to maintain his divorced sister, her daughter, and his old mother. The core legal issues were whether ₹5,000 per month was just and reasonable and whether the father was liable to pay enhanced maintenance and share education expenses despite his other dependents. The High Court held that the father is legally obligated to maintain his son under Section 20, and that the access grievance did not survive since the son had attained majority. The Court found ₹5,000 inadequate for a meritorious IIT student, while rejecting the father's claim that the amount was excessive. It enhanced the maintenance to ₹7,500 per month from 27.10.2015 and directed both parents to bear the son's education expenses equally until completion of his education. The father's appeal was dismissed, the son's appeal was allowed, and arrears were to be cleared within three months.
Headnote
A) Hindu Law - Maintenance - Father's Duty to Maintain Son - Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 20 - The father is under a legal obligation to provide maintenance to his son, including a major son pursuing higher education, and cannot rely on lack of access or other dependents to defeat the child's priority - Held that the respondent father is liable to make provision for the maintenance of the petitioner and the access grievance did not survive after the son attained majority (Paras 9-12). B) Hindu Law - Quantum of Maintenance - Enhancement of Maintenance - Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 20 - The Family Court's award of ₹5,000 per month was not just and reasonable given the son's admission to IIT Dhanbad and the father's monthly salary of about ₹45,000 - Held that monthly maintenance of ₹7,500 is just and reasonable and payable from the date of petition, 27.10.2015 (Paras 11-12). C) Hindu Law - Education Expenses - Equal Sharing by Parents - Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 20 - Both parents, being teachers, are equally responsible to bear the son's education expenses until the completion of his education - Held that the respondent and the mother shall equally bear the education expenses and devise a mechanism to obtain and share the statement of expenses (Paras 10, 12). D) Family Law - Parental Access - Effect of Child Attaining Majority - No codified provision - The father's grievance that the mother denied him access to the son was not a valid defence to the maintenance claim once the son attained majority and could freely meet the father - Held that this fact would not stand in the way of the petitioner getting maintenance from the respondent (Para 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the monthly maintenance of ₹5,000 awarded by the Family Court to the son was just and reasonable or required enhancement; whether the father's appeal for reduction of maintenance should be allowed.
Final Decision
Family Court Appeal No. 43 of 2019 was dismissed. Family Court Appeal No. 16 of 2020 was allowed. The order awarding maintenance of ₹5,000 per month was modified; the respondent father was directed to pay ₹7,500 per month to the son towards maintenance from 27.10.2015. Both parents were directed to equally bear the son's education expenses till completion of his education. Arrears, if any, were to be cleared within three months.
Law Points
- A father is liable to maintain his son
- including a major child pursuing higher education
- under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act
- 1956
- quantum of maintenance must reflect the child's living and education expenses
- both parents should share education expenses
- the father's other dependents do not reduce the child's maintenance priority
- denial of access by mother ceases to be a defence once the child attains majority
