A son’s or daughter’s liability to pay maintenance amount to his or her parents is not just a duty but a dharma — a much larger behavioural aspect that encompasses duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and so on, the Madras High Court Bench here has said. Justice S. Vimala made the observation while hearing a criminal revision case filed by an individual from Madurai challenging an order passed by a lower court last year directing him to pay Rs. 3,000 every month towards maintenance of his 70-year-old mother.
The petitioner claimed that his mother had no right to claim maintenance since she did not perform the role expected of a mother, and deserted her husband and two sons (including the petitioner) in order to get her daughter married to the latter’s maternal uncle.
He also alleged that his mother was always interested in obtaining her husband’s properties than taking care of the family.
Condemning the petitioner for levelling such baseless allegations, the judge said that there was no iota of evidence to prove any of the charges levelled against her.
The judge pointed out that the mother had left her matrimonial house only when the petitioner was 22 years old and his brother was 14 due to a property dispute that generally arose between spouses in many families due to fear of insecurity that came along with ageing.
“The right of the mother to expect the children to maintain her is not only a statutory, Constitutional, fundamental, natural or moral right but also a basic human right. Under such circumstances, the son ought not to have made the mother approach the court to make him realise his duties and responsibilities.
“Paradoxically, the son, instead of speaking about his duties and responsibilities, has spoken about the duties and responsibilities of his mother of which he has no authority to speak…The claim for maintenance cannot be a match for profit and loss account,” the judge observed.
Finding that the petitioner’s younger brother was working as a software engineer in Canada and he had remained ex-parte in the maintenance proceedings, the judge directed him also to pay Rs. 15,000 every month to his widowed mother now residing along with her daughter, also a widow.
“The claim for maintenance cannot be a match for profit and loss account”
