Home High Courts Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Man for Challenging ₹5K Maintenance to Aged Mother
High CourtsPunjab-Haryana High Court

Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Man for Challenging ₹5K Maintenance to Aged Mother

Share
Share

Chandigarh – In a strong rebuke, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a man’s petition challenging the award of ₹5,000 as maintenance to his 77-year-old mother, imposing a cost of ₹50,000 on him. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri directed that the amount be deposited in the name of the mother before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sangrur, within three months.

Expressing shock at the man’s actions, the Court remarked, “It is a classic example of Kalyug which is reflected from the present case which has shaken the conscience of this Court.” It further noted that the ₹5,000 maintenance was on the lower side but could not be enhanced as the elderly mother had not filed a separate petition for an increase.

Background of the Case

The elderly woman, a widow since 1992, is survived by a son and a married daughter. Her other son had passed away, leaving behind his widow and two sons. After her husband’s demise, 50 bighas of land devolved upon her surviving son and the sons of her deceased son.

In 1993, she was granted ₹1 lakh for past, present, and future maintenance. With no financial support, she eventually moved in with her married daughter.

The son contested the family court’s maintenance order, arguing that since his mother did not reside with him, he was not liable to pay her maintenance.

Court’s Response

Dismissing his argument, the Court emphasized that once it was established that the elderly woman had no income, there was no valid ground for her son to challenge the order.

The Court sternly observed, “It actually shocks the conscience of this Court whereby the son has chosen to file the present petition against his own mother challenging fixation of maintenance of ₹5,000/- although he succeeded the property of his father and the old age mother of 77 years does not have any source of income and has been living with her daughter.”

Calling it an unfortunate case, the Court upheld the family court’s order and imposed a penalty on the petitioner.

Subscription Box

Subscribe to LawPost

Subscribe to our free newsletter to get all the latest legal news instantly!

Related Articles