IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
MIHIJA. T.A. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
ORDER
This revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 06.10.2021 passed by the Family Court, Nedumangad, in M.C.No. 539 of 2018, declining maintenance to the wife.
2. The petitioner is the wife of respondent No.2. She had filed M.C.No. 539 of 2018 against respondent No.2 claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month, under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. After trial, the Family Court dismissed the maintenance case on the ground that the petitioner was living separately from respondent No.2 without sufficient reason. The said order is under challenge in this revision petition.
3. I have heard both sides.
4. Respondent No.2 does not have any case that the petitioner has any job or source of income. Admittedly, respondent No.2 was employed in the Gulf. According to him, he has come down from the Gulf and thereafter he has no job.
5. It is true that the obligation of a husband to maintain his wife is not absolute. It is subject to the corresponding marital obligation of the wife to reside along with him and to discharge her marital obligations. However, if the wife chooses to live separately for valid and sufficient grounds such as cruelty or desertion, still she can
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.