"He Is No Longer An Able Bodied Man": Karntaka HC Rejects Wife's Plea Seeking Maintenance From Husband Who Suffers From 75% Disability
The Karnataka High Court questioned a wife’s maintenance claim considering that she was a qualified working woman while her husband suffered 75% disability.
The Court stated that the primary factor to consider for grant of maintenance was whether a husband was an able-bodied man to maintain his wife or child who sought the same.
The Court held that the trial court should have allowed the application seeking recall of the order of maintenance since the husband was “in the teeth of the disability of the petitioner who also suffers from cognitive dysfunction.”
A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed, “This Court, for the present, would go by the disability certificate issued by both Government of India and State Government which is based upon the assessment of disability by NIMHANS. If the husband is incapable of earning due to disability, it is highly ununderstandable as to why and how the wife is insisting on payment of maintenance looking at the admitted disability of the husband.”
Advocate Radhika M. represented the petitioner, while Advocate B.V. Krishna appeared for the respondent.
The husband initially sought annulment of his marriage with the wife. Subsequently, the wife filed for interim maintenance, which the trial court granted. However, the husband suffered a stroke, resulting in a Chronic Neurological Condition assessed at 75%, leading him to resign from employment.
Following this, the husband filed an application seeking the recall of the interim maintenance order. This request was denied, with the wife arguing that the husband had recovered from his illness and was now capable of work being an "able bodied person."
The High Court observed that the husband had been unemployed since his disability, supported by a disability certificate as mandated by law. Highlighting the severity of the husband's condition, the Court pointed out that his 75% disability "takes away all the badge of the husband to be an able bodied man as disability is admitted.”
Meanwhile, the wife initiated an execution petition against the husband, alleging non-payment of maintenance. Consequently, the trial court issued a fine levy warrant against the husband.
The High Court noted the wife's educational qualifications, including a Masters in Computer Application and pre-MCA completion, along with her employment as a teacher in various schools.
“By no means he can be depicted to be an able bodied man to direct that he should search for such avocation that would enable him to maintain the wife and the child. The wife is earning, even if not earning is completely qualified and is capable of earning. Therefore, the orders that are now sought to be passed by the wife cannot even be considered to be passed,” the Court observed.
“No direction can be issued to the husband to pay maintenance to the wife/respondent as he is no longer an able bodied man to search for employment and pay maintenance to maintain the wife and the child,” the Court held.
The Court further observed that “the father of the husband/petitioner should take care of the grandchild’s necessities including her education and other necessities of her career and all walks of life of the grandchild. This is the only relief that the wife/respondent is entitled to, in the case at hand. The claim of the wife for enhancement of maintenance to 70% is, on the face of it, untenable and is rejected.”
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the petition.
Cause Title: XYZ v. ABC
Appearance:Karnataka High Court
Petitioner: Advocate Radhika M.
Respondent: Advocate B.V.Krishna
