Delhi High Court ruled that child maintenance is a legal duty, not charity. Both parents must ensure the child lives with dignity and security.
The Delhi High Court has clearly said that giving maintenance money is not a favour done by one parent to the other.
It is a legal responsibility that comes from being a parent and from the child’s right to be taken care of.
Read Also: Allahabad High Court Reserves Judgment in High-Profile Gyanvapi Mosque Case
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while hearing a case involving a father who refused to pay maintenance for his two minor children, made some important remarks on the issue of maintenance.
She said,
“Maintenance is not a favour but rather a recognition of shared parental responsibility, and of the child’s right to be supported.”
The case was about a man who had filed an appeal against a local trial court’s order which had directed him to pay Rs 50,000 every month as interim maintenance to his wife, who lives with their two young children.
The father claimed that this amount was too high and said that since the wife also has a job, she should bear 50% of the expenses related to the children.
However, the High Court dismissed the father’s appeal and supported the lower court’s decision. The judge said that giving maintenance should not be seen as charity or punishment.
She said,
“Maintenance is not meant to belittle the non-custodial parent, nor is it a measure of punishment. Similarly, the custodial parent should not be viewed as someone seeking charity or alms.”
The Court stressed that children should not feel like they are missing out on anything just because they are living with only one parent.
ALSO READ: Paternity Of Children| Allahabad HC Orders Man to Undergo DNA Test or Pay Maintenance
Justice Sharma stated,
“A child who is living with a single parent should not feel deprived, either materially or emotionally.”
She further added,
“Maintenance must ensure that the child is able to live with the same dignity as he would have, had he been living with both the parents, particularly with the financial security that may have come from the father’s support.”
During the case, it came out that the father had tried to hide his actual earnings. He did not share proper documents about his grocery business, which the Court viewed as an attempt to show a lower income than what he really earns.
The judge noted that the man had
“attempted to project an unrealistically low income to avoid his legal obligations” and hence did not accept his claim that he could not afford the maintenance.
The trial court had earlier calculated that the father’s monthly income was around Rs 1.75 lakh. Based on this, the Court found Rs 50,000 per month as a fair amount for the care and upbringing of the two minor children.
This ruling by the Delhi High Court sets an important example by underlining that maintenance is a basic duty and not an optional act of generosity.
It also puts focus on the rights of the child and the responsibilities of both parents, especially in cases where one parent tries to escape from their financial duties.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Child Maintenance
