Case Note & Summary
The revision petition was filed by K. Jayaprakash, the son, challenging the order dated 09.08.2016 passed by the Family Court, Shivamogga in Crl.Misc.No.214/2015. The Family Court had directed the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each per month to his parents, N. Kuppaswamy and Smt. Kanthamma, who were the respondents in this revision. The petitioner, represented by Sri M. Ravindranath, argued that the order suffered from serious infirmity, that the Family Court failed to appreciate the oral and documentary evidence on record, and that the maintenance amount was illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the evidence. The High Court, after hearing the counsel and perusing the record, found no merit in the petition. The court observed that the Family Court had correctly appreciated the evidence and that the maintenance amount was just and proper. The court dismissed the revision petition, confirming the order of the Family Court. The judgment was delivered by Justice Jyoti Mulimani on 17th November 2020.
Headnote
A) Maintenance - Obligation of Son - Section 20 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 - The court considered whether a son is liable to maintain his aged parents who are unable to maintain themselves. The court held that the son is duty-bound to maintain his parents, and the Family Court's order directing payment of Rs.2,000/- each per month was just and proper, based on the evidence on record. (Paras 1-6)
B) Maintenance - Quantum - Appreciation of Evidence - The court examined whether the quantum of maintenance awarded was excessive. The court held that the amount of Rs.2,000/- each per month was reasonable and not arbitrary, considering the needs of the parents and the son's capacity to pay. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of the Family Court directing the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each per month to his parents is legal and proper?
Final Decision
The revision petition is dismissed. The order dated 09.08.2016 passed by the Family Court, Shivamogga in Crl.Misc.No.214/2015 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Obligation of son to maintain aged parents
- Quantum of maintenance
- Appreciation of evidence in maintenance proceedings
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (11) 5
N. Kuppaswamy and Smt. Kanthamma
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Revision petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act challenging the order of maintenance passed by the Family Court.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (son) sought to set aside the order of the Family Court directing him to pay maintenance to his parents.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the order of the Family Court directing him to pay Rs.2,000/- each per month to his parents.
Previous Decisions
The Family Court, Shivamogga in Crl.Misc.No.214/2015 passed an order on 09.08.2016 directing the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each per month to the respondents.
Issues
Whether the order of the Family Court directing maintenance is legal and proper?
Whether the quantum of maintenance awarded is excessive?
Submissions/Arguments
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of the Family Court suffers from serious infirmity and is liable to be set aside.
The Family Court failed to appreciate oral and documentary evidence available on record.
The order of maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the material evidence on record.
Ratio Decidendi
A son is obligated to maintain his aged parents who are unable to maintain themselves under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The quantum of maintenance awarded by the Family Court was just and proper based on the evidence on record.
Judgment Excerpts
The order dated 09.08.2016 passed by the Family Court, Shivamogga in Crl.Misc.214/2015 is called in question in this revision petition whereby, learned Judge of the Family Court has directed the respondent to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- each per month to the petitioners 1 and 2.
Sri.Ravindranath, learned counsel submits that the order of the Family Court suffers from serious infirmity and the same is liable to be set aside.
Procedural History
The Family Court, Shivamogga passed an order on 09.08.2016 in Crl.Misc.No.214/2015 directing the petitioner to pay maintenance to the respondents. The petitioner filed a revision petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act before the High Court of Karnataka, which was dismissed on 17.11.2020.
Acts & Sections
- Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956: Section 20
- Family Courts Act, 1984: Section 19(4)
