The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that a husband’s care and attention towards his parents, or disputes with in-laws, cannot justify a wife leaving the matrimonial home and subsequently claiming maintenance under the law.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that problems with in-laws and a husband’s attention or care toward his parents cannot be used as grounds for a wife to leave the matrimonial home and claim maintenance.
A bench of Justice Jai Kumar Pillai issued the ruling while allowing a husband’s petition against an order passed by a Family Court.
The Family Court had directed the husband to pay Rs.20,000 per month as maintenance Rs.10,000 to his estranged wife and Rs.5,000 each to their two minor children.
The bench observed,
“In the realm of matrimonial jurisprudence, a lack of harmony with in-laws or a husband dedicating attention and care to his parents and family members cannot, under any circumstance, be construed as a justifiable or sufficient ground for a wife to abandon the matrimonial home and subsequently claim maintenance,”
The case arose after the couple developed disputes, following which the wife moved to her parents’ house. Subsequently, she approached the court by filing an application under Section 125 of the CrPC seeking maintenance.
The husband argued that the wife had left voluntarily and was residing at her parents’ home, and that she had not informed him about the birth of their child.
Before the Family Court, the wife contended that she lived separately due to strained relations with her in-laws and because her husband allegedly gave more attention to his parents than to her. The Family Court accepted her arguments and granted maintenance.
However, the High Court disagreed with that reasoning and emphasized that a lack of harmony with in-laws or a husband caring for his parents cannot be treated as sufficient justification for a wife to leave the matrimonial home and claim maintenance.
The court said,
“A son maintaining his parents is absolutely normal in Indian culture and ethos. The expectation that a husband must sever ties with or withdraw attention from his parents to appease his wife is legally recognised as unreasonable,”
The High Court also referred to Section 125(4) of the CrPC and noted that a wife is not entitled to maintenance if she refuses to live with her husband without sufficient reason.
The court clarified that valid reasons could include situations such as complete neglect by the husband, denial of fundamental rights, severe cruelty, or continuous physical or mental abuse.
Additionally, the High Court observed that the husband had previously been acquitted in a cruelty case filed by the wife. It further noted that the wife’s allegations claiming the husband had an illicit relationship with her sister-in-law were not substantiated and amounted to serious mental cruelty.
Terming the Family Court’s decision a patent error, the High Court set aside the Rs.10,000 monthly maintenance granted to the wife.
At the same time, the court made it clear that the father’s obligation toward his children remains unaffected by matrimonial disagreements. It continued the maintenance for both minor children and increased it from Rs.5,000 each to Rs.7,500 per month, raising the total child maintenance to Rs.15,000 per month.