2011 Supreme(Online)(KER) 29683
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
R.BASANT, K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ
ISMAYIL – Appellant
Versus
FATHIMA – Respondent
WP(C)/28433/2010
SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ
The legal obligation to maintain an unmarried daughter includes the duty to meet her marriage expenses, reflecting the contemporary understanding of maintenance.
Headnote:
Maintenance - Unmarried Adult Daughter - Family Courts Act - Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act - Section 2 List - The court concluded that the obligation to maintain an unmarried daughter includes the duty to meet her marriage expenses as part of the broader concept of maintenance under personal law.
Fact of the Case:
A Muslim father challenged a Family Court's order to pay maintenance and marriage expenses for his adult unmarried daughter, arguing that his obligation did not include the latter under personal law.
Issues: Whether the concept of maintenance for an unmarried adult daughter includes the obligation to meet her marriage expenses under Muslim personal law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the concept of maintenance under personal law must reflect contemporary societal norms and includes marriage expenses as essential for an unmarried daughter's well-being.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Basant,J.
How is the concept of maintenance to an unmarried adult daughter to be understood? Does that conceptually include the obligation to meet the marriage expenses of an adult daughter? Is the concept of maintenance payable by a Muslim father to his adult daughter to be understood differently? These are the questions that arise for consideration in this writ petition.
2. Reference to the essential factual matrix may be relevant. The husband/father is the petitioner. His wife and daughter had filed O.P.No.1603/09 before the Family Court, Thrissur, claiming past and future maintenance to them as also the prospective marriage expenses of the daughter. This petition was filed under Sec.7 of the Family Courts Act. An amount of `1,20,000/- towards past maintenance and maintenance at the rate of `3,000/- per mensem for each towards future maintenance as also an amount of `10,00,000/- as prospective marriage expenses of the adult major daughter aged 21 years were claimed.
3. Along with the said O.P. an application was filed for attachment of 50 cents of property belonging to the writ petitioner. That petition was allowed and attachment was effected. An application was filed by the petitioner for lifting the attachment. By the impugned order, the learned Judge rejected the application for lifting the attachment.
4. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. Various contentions are raised. Inter alia, the crucial contention is raised that the Muslim father has no obligation to meet the marriage expenses of his adult daughter. The liability to maintain her does not include the liability to meet the marriage expenses. Whatever may be the liability of fathers similarly situated belonging to other religious denominations, the Muslim father has no such legal liability, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is hence prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and the application for attachment may be rejected.
5. We found the question raised to be interesting. We requested the counsel to advance detailed arguments. We felt persuaded to seek the assistance of Sri.M.P.M. Aslam as amicus curiae. We must acknowledge the able services rendered by Sri.M.P.M. Aslam as amicus curiae to this Court.
6. The learned amicus curiae first of all submits that it is not necessary to consider the claim for marriage expenses of the daughter as an incident of the right of maintenance. The learned counsel accepts that the Muslim father in the Indian context undoubtedly has the moral obligation to ensure that his daughter is married and to meet expenses for such marriage. Sri. Aslam argues that it is not necessary to treat this as an incident of the right of maintenance of the daughter. It is enough if the same is considered as an obligation imposed by custom or usage. Sri. Aslam argues that if such an approach is made, it will be unnecessary to refer to the provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act 1937, to justify such a direction for payment of marriage expenses. According to Sri. Aslam, under Sec.2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act , the Personal Law of Muslims is made applicable only in respect of certain specified matters. Maintenance is one such matter. If the right to claim marriage expenses is reckoned as an incident of the right to maintenance, the direction to pay the same will have to be justified under the Muslim Personal Law. Otherwise, if the claim is reckoned as one based on custom or usage, there shall be no obligation to justify the direction for payment of marriage expenses under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) .
7. We extract Sec.2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)
Application Act below:
“2. Application of Personal Law to Muslims.-- Notwithstanding any customs or usage to the contrary, in all questions (save questions relating to agricultural land) regarding intestate succession, special property of females, including personal property inherited or obtained un