HC tells lower court to reconsider Rs 2 lakh maintenance to wife after she is unable to prove domestic violence charge
Representational Image
ADVERTISEMENT
The Bombay High Court (HC) has come to the rescue of an NRI in the US, overturning a lower court order passed in favour of his wife who had filed a domestic violence case against him.
The woman had demanded maintenance of Rs 5 lakh a month and accommodation, of which the family court in Pune had ordered the man to pay Rs 2 lakh a month. The man challenged this order in HC, claiming there was no domestic violence, and because the wife had been unable to give any instance of physical or mental violence, the HC set aside the family court order and instructed it to reconsider monthly maintenance to the estranged wife. The maintenance has now been brought down to Rs 25,000.
Back story
The couple was married on July 11, 1997 and lived in Houston, Texas, till 2004. They have a daughter still studying there and a son, who is currently with the mother in Pune. The husband said the woman had lost interest in married life and approached the family court in Pune to remove the children from his custody. The woman also made an application asking for maintenance of Rs 5 lakh per month and reimbursement of the son's school fees to the tune of Rs 50,000 under section 20 of the Protection of Domestic Violence Act. She told the court that the man's monthly salary was Rs 15 lakh, with perks of another Rs 5 lakh.
The family court took into consideration the fact that it was the responsibility of the man to maintain his wife and children, and awarded maintenance of Rs 2 lakh a month.
Husband approaches HC
The husband moved the high court against the verdict and also submitted an affidavit to show that the company he was working for had been placed under the control of an official liquidator and under these circumstances it was difficult for him to pay the Rs 2 lakh in maintenance. In the affidavit, he also stated that he was paying for his daughter's education in the US through a loan and was also paying for his son's education.
Court's observation
Justice Bharati Dangre, after hearing both parties, observed that the wife could not give a single instance of any act of domestic violence, which would have brought her under the category of 'aggrieved person', entitling her for benefits under Section 12, including section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Order passed
The HC directed the family court to reconsider the application for maintenance within a period of three months. Till the family court decides the matter, the husband has been directed to pay an amount of Rs 25,000 per month to the wife towards maintenance. The husband has also been directed to bear the educational expenses of the son and not default in payment of his school fees.
Attempts to contact Advocate Seema Sarnaik, the man's lawyer, were unsuccessful. Advocate Mikhail Dey, who was closely following the case, said, "The court has correctly observed that the ambit of section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act doesn't fit in this particular case, as there is no direct evidence produced to establish any physical or mental harassment."
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
