Thursday, 4 February 2016

Disabled man capable of getting job can't claim huge maintenance from estranged wife: HC

A man with a disability who does not take up a job despite being capable, is not entitled to a huge amount as maintenance from his estranged wife, the Bombay high court has ruled. Justice M S Sonak reduced the interim monthly maintenance granted to Pune resident Prakash Gijare, who is in a wheelchair, that is payable by his wife Seema, a theatre actor, to Rs 2,000.

“(Prakash) is in a position to take up suitable employment and the mere circumstance that he is not doing so, does not mean that the respondent is entitled to exorbitant maintenance from his wife,“ said the judge.

Prakash met with an accident in 2004 and has been in a wheelchair since then. His disability is certified at 51%, but the court noted that from the medical records, it can't be said that he is totally disabled from doing any work or that needs only bed rest. “He does appear to have exaggerated his position and such exaggeration might have nexus with the claim for maintenance which he has made against the wife,“ said the HC.

Seema's lawyer had brough evidence on record that he used to run computer classes from home. “Prakash is no doubt en titled to have his case evaluated with sensitivity , particularly considering his physical impa irment. But it must be noted that there is no need to encoura ge his conviction, that he is no at all obliged to make any efforts to earn any income and that it is the unconditional duty of his wife to go on providing with ma intenance,“ the HC said. Prakash and Seema got married in 2000, but started living separately from 2001. Seema sought divorce in 2002. After Prakash met with an accident in 2004, he filed a maintenance claim. In 2015, a family court, in an interim order, told Seema to pay maintenance ranging from Rs 3,000 to Rs 5,000 for different periods. Seema moved the HC claiming that she was unemployed and had to leave a job after Prakash and his mother created aruckus at her workplace.
(Couple's names changed to protect identity)

SOURCE::: Feb 04 2016 : The Times of India (Mumbai), p.2

No comments:

Post a Comment