Senior citizens married for one month; husband still needs to pay maintenance, says HC

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru:

A 64-year-old man who approached the High Court challenging a lower court order that ordered him to pay his wife of ‘one month’ interim maintenance of Rs.7,000 per month was told he needs to pay it anyway. The senior citizen had married a 58-year-old woman and the two could survive the marriage for only one month before the wife left him.

The couple is now 66 and 60 years of age. When they were 64 and 58 respectively, they married in March 2020. Both were seeking companionship. “On 29-04- 2020 the innings of the couple began and on 29-05-2020 the respondent deserted the petitioner and leaves the matrimonial home,” the HC noted.

She applied for divorce but withdrew the petition but was awarded the monthly maintenance in the petition she filed for maintenance. The lower court ordered the husband to pay her Rs.7,000 per month. This was challenged in the HC by the husband. He claimed that she had deserted him and neglected him and he was still “ready and willing to welcome the respondent back and lead a happy married life.”

The woman however contended that “though she stayed for a month with the petitioner it becomes impossible for her to live with him as he was constantly harassing,” her. The HC considering both arguments said that the wife withdrawing the petition for divorce was of no consequence to the case of maintenance.

“So long as the respondent remains a legally wedded wife of the petitioner and the fact that she has been deserted by the husband, interim maintenance is a matter of right to the wife,” it said. Justice M Nagaprasanna in his judgement said that the lower court judge had applied his mind to the issues before him “and by balancing the right of both the petitioner and the respondent has rewarded a sum of Rs 7,000 to be paid to the respondent as interim maintenance.

The reasons rendered are cogent and coherent which would not call for any interference at the hands of this Court.” The court also noted that though the husband says he is willing to live with her he has not taken any action in that regard. It said he cannot take exception to the lower court order “merely because the petitioner is ready and willing to take her back. If that be so, the petitioner could have preferred a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, which he has not preferred till date.

So long as the respondent remains the wife, it is the duty of the petitioner to maintain the wife.” The man also claimed that the Rs.7,000 awarded was very high as he did not have sufficient income. The court however said that, “The amount of maintenance awarded is Rs 7,000. The Court while awarding such maintenance has taken note of the fact that the petitioner and the respondent both are senior citizens.”