RANCHI: The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that an elderly father-in-law’s responsibility to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law and grandchildren does not cease merely because of his advanced age.
Upholding a Family Court’s order, A Division Bench of Chief Justice MS Sonak and Justice Manoj Prasad directed an 84-year-old man to pay Rs 17,000 per month as maintenance to his widowed daughter-in-law and two minor grandsons.
“The fact remains that the pious responsibility of maintaining the widowed daughter-in-law and the grandchildren does not get exonerated on account of the age of the present appellant. Nothing rebuts the claim that a monthly rental of more than Rs 18,000 is paid to the present appellant or his wife, leading to a cumulative monthly income of more than Rs 50,000/-.
Therefore, in view of the statutory mandate contained under the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, the appellant was under a legal obligation and pious duty to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law and grandchildren who are dependents,” stated the court order.
The Bench said that the maintenance sum fixed by the Principal Judge is not unreasonable and the respondents are entitled to it under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.
The dispute originated after the daughter in-law, whose husband was the appellant's only son, approached the Family Court seeking maintenance for herself and her two minor children following her husband's death on October 27, 2020.
She alleged that her father-in-law had failed to support the family after her husband's death, adversely affecting the children's education. She also submitted that she had no independent source of income and had not received any share in her deceased husband's estate.
She further claimed that her father-in-law was drawing a monthly pension of over Rs 32,000, had fixed deposits worth more than Rs 80 lakh and possessed other sources of income. On this basis, she sought monthly maintenance of ₹75,000 for herself and her children.
Opposing the plea, the father-in-law submitted that he was over 83 years old and that his wife, aged over 80, was also dependent on him. The man acknowledged that he received a monthly pension of approximately Rs 32,000 and denied having fixed deposits worth Rs 80 lakh.
He maintained that his retirement benefits had been spent on constructing a house. He also claimed that he had been supporting his daughter-in-law and grandsons, including bearing the children's educational expenses.
The Family Court, taking into account his pension and rental earnings, directed him to pay Rs 7,000 per month to his widowed daughter-in-law and Rs 5,000 each to her two minor sons until they attained majority.
Referring to Sections 19,20,21 and 22 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the High Court noted that the appellant earned over Rs 32,000 in monthly pension, besides rental income of more than Rs 18,000. Holding that a sum Rs 17,000 maintenance award was reasonable against his monthly income of Rs 50,000 and dismissed his appeal.
