Recently, the court delivered a judgment on 10th March 2022, in Ajay Kumar Rathee v. Seema Rathee[i] wherein it has refused to allow the daughter born to the couple to claim education and marriage expenses from her father as she said that she does not want to maintain a relationship with him. The Court held that a daughter not willing to maintain any relationship with her father is barred to claim money for her education or marriage.
Facts in brief
- A marriage was solemnized between the parties on 29th April 1998 at Rohtak according to Hindu rites and the parties resided together, and the marriage was consummated.
- A daughter was born on 20th 2001 out of wedlock and was named Jyotsana. The appellant contended that the respondent has been residing in her father’s home after he passed away since Dec. 2002.
- A panchayat was convened on two separate occasions but it is the case of the appellant that the respondent refused to live with him.
- Hence, a petition for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the appellant u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, however, it was dismissed on default on 7th 2004.
The Apex Court had earlier put a condition to the husband that he will be granted divorce only if he agrees to bear the educational expense of his daughter. However, when both the father and the daughter met at the court’s mediation center then the meeting turned ‘acrimonious and unpleasant’[ii].
Decision of the Supreme Court
The husband is liable to pay alimony
In the instant matter, the court observed that the wife lives with her brother who is supporting her and her daughter’s education. She has no means of earning her living. While determining the amount that is to be paid as permanent alimony to the wife the bench stated that “We consider it appropriate to fix the permanent alimony of the respondent, at present being paid at Rs 8,000 per month as interim maintenance, at Rs.10,00,000 in full and final settlement of all claims.”
While denying any amount to the daughter, the court held that “We are unequivocal of the view that nothing subsists in this marriage except mutual acrimony. It is not even possible for the parties to sit across the table or to even talk over the telephone to come to a reasonable understanding. There remains no doubt about the irretrievable breakdown of marriage in the facts of the present case[iii].”
Father is not liable for finance if the daughter is not maintaining a relationship[iv]
A bench comprising of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh passed a judgment regarding the daughter’s expenses for education and marriage wherein it was found evident from her approach that she does not want to maintain any relationship with her father. The Court opined that “She is entitled to choose her path but then cannot demand from the appellant the amount towards the education. Hence, the daughter is not entitled to any amount.”
The Court further stated that if the mother is willing to support her daughter who has been living with her since birth then funds are available[v]. The Apex Court noted that the daughter of age 20 years was not intending to maintain any relationship with her father and hence she can’t claim any amount from him for marriage and education.
The bench said that to develop and encourage a rapport between the daughter (aged about 20 years) and her father, the respondent’s counsel was asked to arrange a meeting between them. The daughter is an adult now and she would have to develop some interaction with her father if she wants him to play a role in her education.
The court held that “The daughter is not entitled to any amount but while determining the amount to be paid as permanent alimony to the respondent, we are still taking care to see that if the respondent so desires to support the daughter, funds are available.”
It was concluded by the court that a major daughter is entitled to choose her path but then cannot demand from her father the amount towards her education. Hence, the daughter is not entitled to any amount however, while determining the amount that is to be paid as permanent alimony to the respondent (wife) the court considered that she was desired to support the daughter[vi].
Conclusion
The Apex Court in the instant matter has given a clear message to all the major daughters who wish to seek maintenance from their fathers that they are not entitled to education expenses from fathers if they don’t want to maintain any relationship with their father. The daughters who have attained the majority must now approach the court with clean hands.
This is indeed a welcoming judgment as the court has maintained a balance between relationships and responsibilities. If it is a father’s responsibility to bear the expenses of her adult daughter then it is the equal responsibility of the daughter to maintain a cordial relationship with her father, in absence of the same she cannot claim expenses. The court has wonderfully made a balance between right and duty by stating that if a daughter wants her father to support her education and other expenses then she has to play a role of a daughter[vii].
[i] Civil Appeal No. 5141/2011
[ii] https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/daughter-unwilling-to-maintain-relations-with-father-not-entitled-to-get-expenses-from-him-supreme-court/2463960/
[iii] https://lawbeat.in/top-stories/daughter-who-does-not-maintain-any-relationship-her-father-cannot-demand-any-amount-him
[iv][iv][iv] https://mensdayout.com/read-order-major-daughter-not-entitled-to-education-expenses-from-father-as-she-does-not-want-to-maintain-relationship-with-him-supreme-court/
[v] https://www.moneylife.in/article/daughter-not-keen-to-maintain-relationship-with-father-not-entitled-to-money-sc/66674.html
[vi] https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-holds-a-major-daughter-not-entitled-to-education-expenses-from-father-as-she-does-not-want-to-maintain-relationship-with-him-194363
[vii] https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/if-daughter-expects-father-support-education-she-has-to-play-role-daughter-supreme-court
Leave A Comment