Madras High Court
J.Manikandan vs N.Aparna on 1 December, 2022
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:01.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
and
C.M.P.Nos.15070 & 15081 of 2022
J.Manikandan ... Appellant in both the appeals
Vs.
N.Aparna ... Respondent in both the appeals
COMMON PRAYER: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed under
Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 praying to set aside the order
passed in I.A.Nos.1 of 2021 & 2 of 2022 in O.P.No.1803 of 2020 dated
20.05.2022 pending on the file of the I Additional Family Court, Chennai.
For Appellant : Ms.N.Karpagam.
For Respondent : Mr.R.Krishnan.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by SUNDER MOHAN,J.)
The above Civil Miscellaneous Appeals have been filed by the appellant
/ husband aggrieved by the common order dated 20.05.2022 passed in
I.A.Nos.1 of 2021 and 2 of 2022 in O.P.No.1803 of 2020 granting interim
maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the minor child of the appellant and
the respondent and directing the appellant to pay Rs.1,50,000/- towards
educational expenses of the minor child and Rs.25,000/- towards litigation
expenses.
2.The appellant filed petition in O.P.No.1803 of 2020 for divorce on the
ground of cruelty.
3.Pending the said divorce petition, the respondent herein filed I.A.No.1
of 2021 praying for interim maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month and filed
I.A.No.2 of 2022 praying for a direction to the appellant to pay educational
expenses of the minor child and litigation expenses.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
4.The respondent had broadly stated in her petitions for interim
maintenance and for educational and litigation expenses that the marriage
between the appellant and the respondent took place on 15.09.2016 at
Chennai and on 06.07.2017, a male child was born out of the wedlock. From
the beginning, the respondent and the appellant did not have a very cordial
relationship. The respondent had filed a petition for divorce and eversince
their separation, the appellant had not taken care of the respondent and the
minor child. The appellant was working in a company named Barclays
Shared Services Pvt. Ltd. And drawing a salary of more than Rs.34,000/- per
month. He has other sources of earning and hence, he is liable to pay
maintenance to the respondent and the child.
5.The appellant filed a counter stating that the respondent left the
matrimonial home on her own volition. She took away all the jewels and her
articles, when she left the matrimonial home. She was earning more than
Rs.50,000/- per month and she came from a very affluent family. Her father
is earning substantially in business and has properties from which he is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
earning a monthly rent of Rs.60,000/- and hence, the appellant need not pay
maintenance either to the respondent or to the child.
6.Before the Family Court, the respondent marked Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2
and no documents were marked on behalf of the appellant. No oral evidence
were let in either on the side of the appellant or on the side of the respondent.
7.In I.A.No.1 of 2021, the Family Court found that the respondent was
working and hence held that she is not entitled to maintenance and held that
the appellant is liable to maintain the minor child and directed him to pay
Rs.10,000/- per month for the maintenance of the minor child. In I.A.No.2 of
2022, the respondent had prayed for educational expenses and marked the
school bills of the minor child. The Family Court directed the appellant to pay
Rs.1,50,000/- towards educational expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards
litigation expenses to the respondent based on the bills produced by her.
8.The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is
earning a sum of Rs.20,424/- per month which is his take home salary. On
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
the other hand, the respondent on her own, is earning nearly Rs.50,000/- per
month. That apart, the appellant is paying monthly rent of Rs.12,000/-. The
learned counsel relied upon the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court
in “P.R.Ganesh Vs. K.Latika” in C.M.A.No.2733 of 2016 and
C.M.P.No.19734 of 2016 dated 01.06.2017 in support of his submission and
held that the wife is earning and she is capable of maintaining herself, the
husband need not pay maintenance pendent lite and prayed for setting aside
the order of the Court below.
9.The learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted
that the appellant's version, that he is earning only Rs.20,424/- per month is
not substantiated before the Court by filing salary certificate. In fact, in the
document filed by the respondent before the trial Court which is the
appellant's profile given at the time of marriage, it is stated that the appellant
was working in Barclays Shared Services Pvt. Ltd., and earning Rs.34,000/-
per month. The appellant is still working in the said company and his salary
has only increased and not reduced. The appellant has not produced the
salary certificate inspite of the direction given by this Court to him to produce
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
it. The learned counsel submitted that the rental agreement produced by the
appellant to show that he is paying rent, is created for the purpose of denying
the payment of maintenance to the respondent. The rental agreement is dated
11.12.2021 whereas the application for maintenance was filed on 27.12.2021.
The appellant and his parents are living in the house for more than five years
prior to the rental agreement and the appellant had taken the house on lease.
All these would show that the rental agreement has been created only for the
purpose of denying maintenance. The learned counsel further submitted that
the respondent produced bills to the tune of Rs.2,30,000/- for the educational
expenses of the minor child and the Family Court has awarded Rs.1,50,000/-
which is reasonable and the same does not call for interference.
10.We have heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the
pleadings, oral and documentary evidence and materials on record.
11.It is true that when the wife is able to maintain herself, the husband
need not pay any money to support her pendent lite. Therefore, there is no
dispute with the proposition of law laid down by this Court in the Judgment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
cited by the appellant. In this appeal, we are only concerned about the
maintainence payable to the minor child. Admittedly, the respondent is
earning and she can maintain herself. The Family Court, therefore, rightly
concluded that the respondent is not entitled to maintenance from the
appellant. The only question, therefore to be determined, is whether the
appellant is bound to maintain the minor child eventhough the respondent is
earning. The evidence shows that the minor child is in the custody of the
respondent and she has taken care by the respondent and paying for the
educational expenses. The appellant admittedly, is working in Barclays
Shared Services Pvt. Ltd. However, the quantum of salary earned by him is in
dispute. The appellant claimed in his profile given at the time of marriage that
he was earning Rs.34,000/- per month in the year 2016. The appellant has
not disputed the fact that he is still employed in the said Bank. However, in
his affidavit of assets and liabilities, he had stated that his take home salary is
Rs.20,424/- per month. The appellant had not produced his salary certificate
before the Family Court to substantiate his claim that he was earning only
Rs.20,424/- per month. In fact, we had directed the appellant to produce the
salary certificate, however, he has not produced the same even before this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
Court. Therefore, we are inclined to accept the stand of the respondent that
the appellant is earning more than Rs.34,000/- per month.
12.The appellant, as a father, is bound to maintain the minor child. He
has sought for divorce and is bound to support the respondent with regard to
the expenses incurred, atleast for the minor child. The Family Court had
directed the appellant to pay Rs.10,000/- per month for the support of minor
child. We find that the quantum fixed by the Family Court is reasonable in
the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the standard of
living of the parties. Therefore, C.M.A.No.1976 is dismissed by confirming
the order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.P.No.1803 of 2020.
13.As regard, C.M.A.No.1979 of 2022 which is preferred against the
order passed in I.A.No.2 of 2022, the respondent has produced the school fee
receipts and some bills to show that she had incurred certain medical
expenses and educational expenses for the minor child for the past two years.
The bills produced by the respondent shows that the respondent has incurred
nearly 2.5 lakhs for the educational expenses of the minor child. In the light
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
of the documents produced by the respondent, we find that the direction of the
Court below to the appellant to pay Rs.1,50,000/- towards educational
expenses incurred by the respondent is justified and does not call for
interference. Therefore, C.M.A.No.1979 of 2022 is also dismissed.
14.It is just and necessary that the appellant is directed to pay the
arrears of maintenance and the educational expenses along with litigation
expenses ordered by the Family Court within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment and continue to pay the
maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month till the disposal of the O.P.No.1803 of
2020 and the Family Court is directed to dispose of O.P.No.1803 of 2020
expeditiously.
15.In nut shell,
(i)C.M.A.Nos.1976 and 1979 of 2022 are dismissed and the order
passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 and 2 of 2022 are confirmed.
(ii)The appellant is directed to pay the arreas of maintenance,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
educational expenses and litigation expenses awarded in I.A.No.01 of 2021
and 2 of 2022 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this Judgment.
(iii)The Learned I Additional Family Court, Chennai is directed to
dispose of the H.M.O.P.No.1803 of 2020 as expeditiously as possible and in
any event, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this Judgment.
(iv)In the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no order as to
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
(V.M.V.,J) (S.M.,J.)
01.12.2022
ay
Index : Yes / No
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
1.The I Additional Family Court,
Chennai.
2.The Section Officer
V.R Section
Madras High Court.
V.M.VELUMANI,J.
and
SUNDER MOHAN,J.
ay
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
C.M.A.Nos.1976 & 1979 of 2022
and
C.M.P.Nos.15070 & 15081 of 2022
01.12.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
