A husband has a legal obligation to provide maintenance to his wife and children, which cannot be denied based on unproven claims of voluntary desertion.

ORDER :

(P. VELMURUGAN, J.)

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

2. Both the revisions arise from the order passed by the learned 1st Additional Family Judge, Chennai, in a maintenance case in M.C. No. 107 of 2022. Hence, they are taken up together for consideration and disposed of by way of this common order. Crl.R.C.No.2273 of 2024 has been preferred by the husband, challenging the order directing him to pay maintenance to the wife and minor children. Crl.R.C.No.1429 of 2024 has been filed by the wife and children seeking enhancement of the maintenance awarded.

3. For the sake of convenience, the husband will hereinafter be referred to as the "petitioner," and the wife and children will be referred to as the "respondents."

4. The marriage between the husband and the wife was solemnized on 18.11.2004. Out of their wedlock, two children, namely the second and third respondents, were born. As disputes had arisen between the parties, the wife left the matrimonial home The wife filed a petition seeking maintenance for herself and the children, contending that she was unable to maintain herself and the children and that the husband, being financially well-off, had a duty to support them. The learned Judge, upon considering the pleadings and evidence, awarded maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month to the wife, Rs.20,000/- to the minor son, and Rs.15,000/- to the minor daughter.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner / husband contended that the wife voluntarily deserted the matrimonial home without any justifiable reason, disentitling her from claiming maintenance. It was argued that the maintenance awarded was excessive and placed an undue financial burden on the husband. The learned counsel further contended that the petitioner/husband was already providing for the educational expenses of the children and that the maintenance should be reconsidered. It was also argued that the wife had, on multiple occasions, refused attempts at reconciliation and therefore should not be entitled to any monetary support. Additionally, it was submitted that the husband had extended financial support on previous occasions and had not abdicated his responsibility toward his children, but a structured monthly maintenance of such a high amount was unjustified. The husband also asserted that the wife was residing separately without sufficient cause and was intentionally prolonging the dispute, making it impossible to resume normal marital relations.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents / wife and children argued that there was no conclusive judicial determination proving that the wife left the matrimonial home voluntarily. It was submitted that despite attempts for reconciliation, the husband failed to take any initiative to resume cohabitation. The wife, being unemployed, had no independent source of income, and the children, being minors, were entirely dependent on their father. It was further argued that the husband’s financial condition permitted him to provide for his family, and he could not escape from his obligation merely by citing allegations of desertion. The learned counsel highlighted that the wife had approached the Court seeking restitution of conjugal rights, which clearly established that she had not left the matrimonial home voluntarily. The expenses of raising two minor children, coupled with the increasing cost of education and daily living expenses, warranted an enhancement rather than a reduction of maintenance. Furthermore, it was emphasized that denying maintenance to the wife would not only go against the settled principles of law but would also be unjust and inequitable in the given circumstances.

7. The learned 1st Additional Family Judge carefully examined the evidence and submissions before determining the quantum of maintenance in the order. The learned Judge found that the husband failed to establish that the wife had left the matrimonial home voluntarily. The