Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has quashed an order passed by a family court awarding maintenance in favour of the wife against the husband on the ground that she is still working and drawing more salary than the husband.
Justice B. Siva Sankara Rao allowed the revision petition filed by one B.M. Ranjit Kumar of Srikakulam district challenging the order of the Family Court-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Eluru in West Godavari district of AP.
According to the petitioner, his wife approached the family court seeking maintenance of Rs10,000 per month. The woman, in her petition had said that after their marriage, they lived happily for five days and from the sixth day, her husband said he suspected her fidelity and instigated her to commit suicide so that he could marry another woman for dowry.
The woman complained to the family court that she was neglected by her husband and had no source of income. She appealed to the court for grant of maintenance as her husband was earning Rs 15,000 per month from his job as a lecturer and had landed properties and fixed assets of his own.
The petitioner opposed his claim and said that his wife lived with him for 12 days and thereafter she never visited his home or led a marital life. He said that his wife’s parents performed her marriage with him against her will as she was in love with another person and used to talk to him on the telephone regularly.
He contended that she was not entitled for maintenance as she is working and was able to maintain herself.
He submitted that he was unemployed and was not even worked as part-time lecturer and did not have any property. He said he survived by giving tuitions.
The family court finally awarded maintenance of Rs 4,000 per month. Justice Siva Sankara Rao, after hearing the both parties, noted that the wife of the petitioner was still working and there was no proceedings showing her termination from service as she had claimed before the trial court for granting of maintenance. The judge noted that she was drawing Rs 20,000 per month as salary.
The judge declared that granting of maintenance of Rs 4,000 by the lower court in favour of the woman and against the husband was unsustainable and liable to be set aside. The judge made it clear that the present order would in no way be a bar on any future claim, if circumstances change.
