IMPORTANT POINT
Maintenance – Right of a wife or a minor child to maintenance supersedes employee’s right to claim exemption under Section 60(1)(g) CPC.

JUDGMENT

M.B. Snehalatha, J.—The point for consideration in this petition is whether the retirement benefits, such as pension, gratuity, receivable by the 1st respondent/ father is liable to attachment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, CPC) in a claim for maintenance and educational expenses by his own minor daughter.

2. The minor daughter, through her next friend and mother, filed O.P.No.498/2025 before the Family Court, Chavara, against her father/R1, claiming maintenance and educational expenses past and future, alleging that her father/R1 herein failed to provide maintenance and educational expenses to her. Her case is that, after the divorce between her parents, she is residing with her mother. Presently, she is a Plus Two student. Her father/R1 is working as LD Clerk in Panchayat Department, and he is due to retire on 31.05.2025; that though he has got sufficient means and income, he failed to provide any maintenance to her and failed to meet her educational expenses. Though in M.C. (DV) No.104/2009, the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karunagappally, had ordered to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month, even the said meagre amount was not paid by R1 and she has filed C.M.P.No.4699/2024 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karunagappally. Petitioner is now studying in a Public School at Kozhikode and has already incurred an expense of Rs.2,74,900/- towards tuition and hostel fees. After completion of the Plus Two course, she requires a sum of Rs.3 lakhs as course fees for further studies and Rs.10,000/- per month towards hostel fees. Petitioner requires Rs.20,000/- per month for the next three years towards maintenance. 1st respondent – father is earning more than Rs.55,000/- per month. His pay has been revised and he will receive approximately Rs.55 lakhs as pay revision arrears, retirement benefits, DA arrears, etc.

In the O.P petitioner has claimed an amount of Rs.39,94,000/- towards past and future maintenance and educational expenses. She sought attachment before judgment of the retirement benefits due to the 1st respondent on the ground that with a view to defeat the decree, which may be passed against him, R1 is taking hasty steps to withdraw and divert his entire retirement benefits for his own needs.

3. 1st respondent/father resisted the petition, disputing petitioner’s claim. He contended that as he was suffering from various illnesses, he was on leave for a long period and therefore, he would get only nominal amount as retirement benefits. It was contended that he has no house or landed property; that he has to take care of his aged parents. He also contended that his last drawn salary was only Rs.16,000/- and he has no means to pay Rs.20,000/- per month towards maintenance as claimed by the petitioner. Further, it was contended that his retirement benefits have not yet been finally assessed or communicated by the authorities and the claim of the petitioner for Rs.39.94 lakhs is baseless and therefore, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 1st respondent.

5. Admittedly, petitioner is the minor daughter of the 1st respondent. It is also not in dispute that presently she is a Plus Two student. According to the petitioner, as per order in M.C (DV).No.104/2009 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karunagappally, maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000/- per month was ordered to be paid to her; but her father/R1 committed default in payment of even the said paltry amount and therefore she was constrained to file C.M.P.No.4699/2024 for realization of the arrears in the said M.C.

6. The case of the petitioner is that, her father/R1, was working as LD Clerk in the Panchayath Department and he retired from service on 31.5.2025 and he would get an amount of Rs.55 lakhs as retirement benefits; that with a view to defeat her claim for maintenance and educational expenses