IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.Subramaniam, J.
D.Sasikala - Petitioner
Vs.
A.Logesh - Respondent
Tr.C.M.P.No.799 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.13710 of 2022
Decided On : 21-12-2022
Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition - Transfer of Matrimonial Case - Hindu Marriage Act - Section 19, Article 21 of the Constitution of India - Interim Maintenance - Custody and Maintenance of Minor Child
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to transfer a matrimonial case from the IV Additional Family Court at Chennai to the Sub Court at Poonamallee, citing her residence and the need to care for the minor child. The respondent, the father of the minor child, agreed to pay interim maintenance but claimed inability to do so without visitation rights.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the father, as the natural guardian and an earning member, was duty-bound to maintain the minor child, even without a formal application for maintenance. It emphasized the importance of protecting the livelihood of minor children, citing Article 21 of the Constitution of India and principles of social justice.
Issues: The issues revolved around the transfer of the matrimonial case, the obligation of the father to provide interim maintenance for the minor child, and the conduct of the parties in the context of visitation rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the domicile of the wife determines jurisdiction in matrimonial cases and emphasized the need for a meaningful interpretation of provisions meant to enable women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court. It also highlighted the duty of parents to maintain their minor children and the court's role as a custodian of minor children when they are neglected by either parent.
Final Decision: The court allowed the transfer of the matrimonial case to the Sub Court at Poonamallee, directed the respondent to pay interim maintenance to the minor child, and warned of disciplinary proceedings if the maintenance was not paid.
ORDER :
The present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw the case in HMOP No.4714 of 2021 from the file of the IV Additional Family Court at Chennai and transfer the same to the file of the Sub Court at Poonamallee.
2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 06.02.2017 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. From and out of the wedlock between the petitioner and the respondent, a female child was born on 18.01.2018 and now aged about 4-1/2 years. Due to misunderstanding, both the petitioner and the respondent are living separately.
3. The petitioner states that she is residing along with her parents and taking care of 4-1/2 years old female minor child now studying at Kindergarten School.
4. The respondent filed HMOP No.4714 of 2021 for dissolution of marriage on the file of the IV Additional Family Court at Chennai. The petitioner filed the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition to transfer the case to the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee, since she is residing along with her parents at Porur and has to take care of 4-1/2 years old female minor child. The place of the wife is to be preferred for conducting trial of matrimonial disputes.
5. The respondent who is present before this Court informed that he is working as Junior Assistant in the Medical Department and he is ready and willing to pay an interim maintenance to his minor daughter. The respondent-husband further made an undertaking that he will pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards interim maintenance to the child from December 2022 onwards. Since the respondent spontaneously agreed to pay interim maintenance to the child, the said amount is directed to be paid on or before the 10th day of every calendar month. The interim maintenance amount is to be deposited by the respondent in the bank account of the petitioner, who in turn has to spend the said amount for the education and welfare of the minor child.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that the respondent is not even paying any Interim Maintenance even to the minor girl child, who is Kindergarten School going and that apart, he has filed the divorce petition before the IV Additional Family Court at Chennai to harass the petitioner.
7. The learned counsel for the respondent objected the said contention by stating that the respondent is willing to take care of the minor child and the petitioner is not allowing the respondent to see the child and therefore, he is not in a position to pay the Interim Maintenance.
8. The learned counsel for the respondent reiterated that unless the petitioner permits the respondent to visit the child, he will not be in a position to pay the Interim Maintenance. The tenor of the respondent expressed through the learned counsel for the respondent shows the attitude and conduct of the respondent, who is none other than the father of the 4-1/2 year old female child. Such an approach of the respondent, who is a Public Servant, at no circumstances, be encouraged by this Court.
9. Parents are duty bound to maintain their minor children. The 4-1/2 year old female child has to be taken care of by the father, who is the natural guardian and an earning member. The petitioner-wife is unemployed and therefore, the respondent-father has to maintain the child.
10. For grant of Interim Maintenance to the minor children, no application is required. Even in the absence of any application, the Courts are bound to consider grant of Interim Maintenance in the interest of the minor children and to protect their livelihood, which is the Fundamental Right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
11. Remedy of maintenance is the measure of social justice as envisaged under the Constitution to prevent the wife and the children from falling into destitution and vagrancy. Preamble and Article 39 and 15(3) of the Indian Constitution envisage social justice and positive State action for empowerment of women and childr
Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya Goel (2000) 9 SCC 255
Geeta Heera vs. Harish Chander Heera
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of parents to maintain their minor children, the court's role as a custodian of minor children, and the need to interpret provisions in ma....
The duty of parents to maintain their minor children, principles of social justice, and the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act and Article 21 of the Constitution of India were central to the judgme....
The duty of parents to maintain their minor children and the constitutional obligation to protect their livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The duty of parents to maintain their minor children and the constitutional obligation to grant Interim Maintenance influenced the court's decision.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.