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.

ORDER :

The present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw the case in HMOP No.788 of 2021 from the file of the Sub Court at Poonamallee and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court at Tiruchirappalli.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 12.02.2020 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. From and out of the wedlock between the petitioner and the respondent, one female child was born now 11 months old. The child is under the custody of the petitioner. Due to misunderstanding, both the petitioner and the respondent are living separately.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent filed HMOP No.788 of 2021 for dissolution of marriage before the Family Court at Poonamallee. The petitioner and her 11 months old male child are now residing along with her parents at Tiruchirappalli. Thus, she is not in a position to travel all along from Tiruchirappalli to Poonamallee and contest the dissolution of marriage filed by the respondent in HMOP No.788 of 2021 before the Sub Court at Poonamallee.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that the respondent is not paying the Interim Maintenance even to the minor child and the petitioner is now residing along with her parents. The petitioner has to maintain her 11 months old female child.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent raised an objection by stating that the petitioner is a Dentist and practicing and therefore, she is capable of contesting the HMOP No.788 of 2021 filed by the respondent before the Sub Court at Poonamallee.

6. The learned counsel for the respondent, based on the instructions given by the respondent, made a submission that the respondent is ready and willing to pay the Interim Maintenance.

7. This Court thought fit to direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards Interim Maintenance to be paid to the petitioner for the purpose of maintenance of the minor child.

8. The respondent, being the father, is responsible for the maintenance of the child. Thus he has to share the maintenance along with the petitioner for the livelihood of the child, which is now with the custody of the petitioner-wife. The Interim Maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month is directed to be paid by the respondent to the petitioner on or before the 10th day of every calendar month, which is to be deposited in the Bank Account of the petitioner and the learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that she will furnish the details of the petitioner-wife Bank Account Number to the learned counsel for the respondent, who in turn has to provide such information to the respondent-husband.

9. 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 and that apart, he has filed the divorce petition before the Sub Court at Poonamallee to harass the petitioner.

10. 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.

11. 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 11 months old female child. Such an approach of the respondent, who is a Public Servant, at no circumstances, be encouraged by this Court.

12. Parents are duty bound to maintain their minor children. The 11 months 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 h