Ensuring Child Well-being Demands Full-time Effort: Karnataka High Court Doubles Support for Homemaker Spouses

Ensuring Child Well-being Demands Full-time Effort Karnataka High Court Doubles Support for Homemaker Spouses

In a groundbreaking decision concerning marital conflicts, the Karnataka High Court has increased the interim financial support granted to a wife by her separated husband. The court emphasized the significant duties involved in nurturing children as a full-time commitment.

Presiding over the case, Justice M Nagaprasanna emphatically asserted that “taking care of children is a full-time job,” rebuffing the husband’s contention that his wife was idling away instead of seeking employment. The judge underscored the exhaustive nature of parenting, emphasizing that the role entails “countless responsibilities and necessary expenditure from time to time.”
The case arose when the woman filed a petition contesting a family court ruling that mandated her husband to pay ₹18,000 per month as interim maintenance while their marital dispute was pending. Represented by her legal counsel, the woman advocated for an increase in maintenance to ₹36,000 per month, citing her husband’s stable job at Canara Bank with a monthly income close to ₹90,000.

Pointing out the husband’s substantial income and the fact that the woman had quit her job as per his request to focus on childcare, the woman’s counsel argued that the husband was failing in his financial duties towards their children, including school fees and other expenses.

In response, the husband’s legal representative argued that the petitioner was capable of earning independently, having previously worked as a lecturer. However, Justice Nagaprasanna, referring to Supreme Court precedents, stressed that maintenance should mirror the standard of living experienced during the marriage.

Dismissing the husband’s assertions of job instability, the Court noted the secure nature of his position at a government undertaking, categorically stating that his arguments were “misleading and mischievous.”

As a result, the High Court granted the woman’s petition, doubling the interim maintenance to ₹36,000 per month.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *