The ruling came in response to a plea filed by a 65-year-old Christian man challenging a family court order directing him to pay Rs20,000 per month to his estranged wife and Rs10,000 to his 27-year-old unmarried daughter. The petitioner argued that his daughter was an adult at the time of filing and hence not eligible for maintenance. He also claimed that his wife, who lives separately, is financially independent.
Partly allowing the petition, the High Court set aside the maintenance order in favor of the daughter while upholding the Rs20,000 monthly maintenance to the wife. The court further maintained the direction to pay Rs30,000 towards the education expenses of the couple’s son.
The bench observed that an adult daughter could seek financial support from her father only if she is unable to sustain herself due to a physical or mental disability. Citing Section 20(3) of HAMA, the court noted that while Hindu and Muslim personal laws mandate maintenance for unmarried daughters, Christian law lacks a parallel provision.
During the hearing, the estranged wife informed the court that she resides in Mumbai for her ailing son’s education and treatment. Acknowledging this, the court remarked that a mother’s parental responsibility outweighs her marital obligations.
The verdict has reignited discussion over disparities in personal laws and the need for uniformity in maintenance rights across faiths.
1.jpg)
