The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK RPFAM No.312 of 2023 (In the matter of application under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 401 of CrPC). Pravat Kumar Mohapatra … Petitioner -versus- Pradyut Priyadarshan Mohapatra … Opposite Party For Petitioner : Mr. P. Das, Advocate For Opposite Party : CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY F DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:22.11.2024(ORAL) G. Satapathy, J. 1. This revision is directed against the impugned judgment dated 29.07.2023 passed in CRP No.92 of 2021 by which the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri has directed the revisional-petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to the OP-minor child towards monthly maintenance w.e.f 01.12.2021. 2. It is undisputed that the OP-minor son is the legitimate son of the revisional-petitioner and his RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 1 of 7 wife Saibismita Priyadarshini Aich under whose custody the child resides, but she does not claim any maintenance for herself. Due to dissension, the wife and husband (revisional-petitioner) although married, are living separately, but the son-OP is staying with his mother. Both husband and wife are employed and are serving as Assistant Manager in Punjab National Bank and Manager in Canara Bank respectively. On the
Legal Reasoning
aforesaid background, an application for maintenance for the son being represented by his mother guardian has been filed, which came to be registered in CRP No.92 of 2021 which was accordingly allowed and the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri by assessing the requirement of the son to be at Rs.25,000/- directed the revisional petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as his share for the maintenance of his son. Being aggrieved with such order, the present revision has been filed by the revisional-petitioner-cum-father of OP. 3.
Legal Reasoning
In the course of hearing of the revision, Mr. Parsuaram Das, learned counsel for the petitioner by highlighting the age of the petitioner submits that it is RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 2 of 7 quite exorbitant to award a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the maintenance of a child aged about two years, but the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri irrationally has awarded such amount to the OP-son and that too, the mother guardian being the Manager of Canara Bank and drawing salary more than what the petitioner- father is drawing has claimed maintenance in the guise of maintenance to the son only to harass the revisonal petitioner. Accordingly, Mr. Das prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner upon perusal of record, it cannot be forgotten that the age of the child must be around four years since his age was two years at the time of filing of application in the year 2021. It is also an admitted fact that both mother and father are Bank employees and drawing good salary. The learned trial Court, has, however, by taking into account the admission of the revisional-petitioner assessed his monthly gross salary at Rs.65,334/-. What is more important is the determination of the requirement of the OP-son for RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 3 of 7 maintenance, who is admittedly a dependent child and whose mother is also employed with whom he is residing. 5. In deciding the maintenance for a child, one should not forget the mode or manner in which maintenance is to be assessed for child was considered by the Apex Court in its judgment in Rajnesh Vrs. Neha and another; (2021) 2 SCC 324, wherein the criteria was laid down for determining the quantum of maintenance for minor children in paragraphs-91 and 92 thereof which are extracted as under:- for food, expenses “91. The living expenses of the child would include clothing, residence, medical expenses, education of children. Extra coaching classes or any other vocational training courses to complement the basic education must be factored in, while awarding child support. Albeit, it should be a reasonable amount for extracurricular/coaching classes, and not an overly extravagant amount which may be claimed. to be awarded 92. Education expenses of the children must be normally borne by the father. If the wife is working the expenses may be shared proportionately between the parties.” sufficiently, earning and RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 4 of 7 6. The issue with regard to maintenance of minor child had also been come up before the Apex Court in Neha Tyagi Vrs. Lieutenant Colonel Deepak Tyagi; (2022) 3 SCC 86, wherein while upholding the decree of divorce granted by the learned trial Court, it is held by the Apex Court that even after the divorce, the husband is not absolved of his liability and responsibility to maintain child/son till he attains the age of majority. In a dispute between the husband and wife, the child should not be made to suffer. In the aforesaid decision, the Apex Court has further held in paragraph-6 as under:- “However, at the same time, the respondent- husband cannot be absolved from his liability and responsibility to maintain his son Pranav till he attains the majority. Whatever be the dispute between the husband and the wife, a child should not be made to suffer. The liability and responsibility of the father to maintain the child continues till the child/son attains the age of majority. It also cannot be disputed that the son Pranav has a right to be maintained as per the status of his father. Xx xx” 7. It is, therefore, clear that the father is not absolved of his duty to maintain his own son, but when RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 5 of 7 the father and mother are both earning, the expenses of the child has to be borne by both of them. This Court, however, wishes to address to the submission as advanced for the petitioner that Rs.10,000/- is too high for a child of two years for its maintenance requirement, but the child in this case must be around four years or more. Further, law is equally settled that the children are to be maintained as per the standard of their parents. It cannot be disputed while taking into account the standard of the parents in this case, that the child may be admitted in a private school where the tuition fees would not be less than Rs.5,000/-, besides its requirement for other things like food, clothing, medical expenses, extra coaching classes so also training for extracurricular activities and in that event, the child would require more amount. 8. In the present case, the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri has assessed the monthly requirement of the child at Rs.25,000/- per month for schooling, health, food and clothing etc., but since mother is getting more salary than the father, the RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 6 of 7 learned Judge, Family Court, Puri accordingly calculated the share of father at Rs.10,000/- out of the amount of Rs.25,000/- required for maintenance of the child by directing the father to contribute Rs.10,000/- per month to his son as monthly maintenance of the child w.e.f. 01.12.2021 till the child attains the age of majority. Hence, the direction to the revisional petitioner to pay such amount to his minor son in the circumstance does not appear to be erroneous or arbitrary or illegal. 9. In the result, the revision petition being devoid of merit stands dismissed, but without any costs. (G. Satapathy) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA DAS Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 22-Nov-2024 16:07:11 Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 22nd day of November, 2024/Subhasmita RPFAM No.312 of 2023 Page 7 of 7