File photo
Pune: In a recent divorce case where the husband filed for separation due to constant disputes over trivial matters, the court granted the husband some relief.
Considering the financial situation of both parties and the evidence of the wife's alleged extramarital affairs, the court ruled that it was not the husband's moral responsibility to support his wife financially. Consequently, the court denied the wife alimony and only approved child support for the daughter.
Judge Raghuvendra Aradhye of the Family Court delivered the verdict and said the husband would have to pay Rs 5,000 per month as child support until the petition is settled.
Suresh and Surekha (names changed) were married on December 29, 1996 and have two children, a son and a daughter. Soon after the wedding, there were frequent arguments between them.
Fed up with the constant quarrels, Suresh filed for divorce in the family court through lawyer Gauri Deshpande. In response, Surekha filed a suit demanding Rs 50,000 as maintenance.
During the proceedings, both parties presented information and documents regarding their income. After reviewing the arguments and evidence presented, the court found: “The income tax returns filed in this action are sufficient to demonstrate the financial standing of both parties.”
Given the conversations and photographs involving Surekha and a third person, it would not be appropriate to draw any conclusions at this stage. However, in my opinion, they are certainly offensive. Taking all these factors into account, there is no moral responsibility on the part of the husband to provide for his wife.”
The court found that the wife's moral or financial responsibility did not lie with her husband if she had extramarital affairs. Moreover, since the wife was employed, the court rejected her claim for maintenance.
The court, however, stressed that despite the wife's employment, the financial responsibility for the daughter also rested with the educated father and ordered the husband to pay Rs 5,000 per month as child support.
“This judgment will be significant in cases where the suit is filed solely to harass the husband,” said lawyer Gauri Deshpande, who is representing Suresh.
Did you enjoy reading The Bridge Chronicle?
Your support motivates us to become even better. Follow us on Facebook, Instagram And Þjórsárden to stay up to date with the latest stories.
Read on the go with our Android And iOS App.
Comments are closed.