Case Note & Summary
The revision petition was filed by the father, Sri Sunil, challenging the order dated 01.10.2014 passed by the Family Court, D.K., Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.44/2013, whereby the Family Court directed him to pay maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month to his minor son Nimnish (represented by his mother and natural guardian, Mrs. Deepa) from the date of petition until the son attains majority. The petitioner contended that the Family Court failed to appreciate the evidence, that since his parents had obtained a decree of divorce he was not obliged to maintain his son, and that he was a coolie worker with meager income. The High Court rejected these arguments, holding that the obligation of a father to maintain his minor child is absolute and does not depend on custody or divorce. The court observed that the Family Court had considered the evidence and the financial status of the parties, and the quantum of Rs.3,500/- was reasonable. The revision petition was dismissed, and the order of the Family Court was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Maintenance of Minor Child - Obligation of Father - Section 125 CrPC, Section 20 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 - The father is under a legal obligation to maintain his minor child irrespective of divorce or custody - The Family Court's order granting maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month to the minor son was upheld - Held that the father cannot shirk his responsibility to maintain his child merely because he has divorced the mother (Paras 5-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Family Court's order directing the father to pay maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month to his minor son is sustainable in law, and whether the father's obligation to maintain his son ceases upon divorce.
Final Decision
The revision petition is dismissed. The order dated 01.10.2014 passed by the Family Court, D.K., Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.44/2013 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Obligation of father to maintain minor child is absolute and not dependent on custody
- Divorce does not absolve father from maintaining his child
- Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is summary remedy
- Quantum of maintenance depends on status and income of parties
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (11) 9
K.Prasanna Shetty (for petitioner), Jeevan K. (for respondent)
Nimnish (minor) represented by mother and natural guardian Mrs. Deepa
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 granted to a minor child.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (father) sought to set aside the Family Court's order directing him to pay maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month to his minor son.
Filing Reason
The father contended that the Family Court failed to appreciate evidence, that he was not obliged to maintain his son after divorce, and that his income was meager.
Previous Decisions
The Family Court, D.K., Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.44/2013 passed an order on 01.10.2014 directing the father to pay Rs.3,500/- per month to the minor son from the date of petition till majority.
Issues
Whether the father's obligation to maintain his minor son ceases upon divorce?
Whether the quantum of maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month is excessive or unreasonable?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Family Court failed to appreciate oral and documentary evidence.
Petitioner argued that since his parents obtained a decree of divorce, he is not obliged to maintain his son.
Petitioner argued that he is a coolie worker with meager income and cannot pay the maintenance amount.
Ratio Decidendi
The obligation of a father to maintain his minor child is absolute and does not depend on custody or divorce. The father cannot shirk his responsibility to maintain his child merely because he has divorced the mother. The quantum of maintenance is determined based on the status and income of the parties, and the Family Court's order was reasonable.
Judgment Excerpts
The order dated 01.10.2014, passed by the Family Court, D.K., Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.44/2013 is called in question in this revision petition, whereby, learned Judge has directed respondent to pay Rs.3,500/- to minor petitioner from the date of petition till he attains majority.
He submitted that the Family Court has failed to appreciate the oral and documentary evidence available on record.
A further submission was made that in view of the divorce, he is not obliged to maintain his son.
Procedural History
The Family Court, D.K., Mangalore passed an order on 01.10.2014 in Crl.Misc.No.44/2013 directing the father to pay maintenance of Rs.3,500/- per month to his minor son. The father 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
- Family Courts Act: 19(4)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 125
- Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956: 20
