Nagpur: Both parents must be equally responsible for maintaining their children’s education costs, ruling the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court after a 18-year-old child approached him, because he felt difficult to pay a fee at IIT Dhanbad, where he had secured reception in the mechanical branch.
Destroy the conflict of the Father that he could not raise the amount of maintenance, because he had to take care of his old mother, divorced sister and his daughter, the bench also held that “children must be the first priority of parents in maintenance issues”.
“Before the birth of the Petitioner in 2001, his parents separated and he had lived with Mother.
His parents served as a teacher, each get a salary of more than Rs 48,000.
Therefore, it is clear that both are responsible for sharing maintenance As well as the cost of their son’s education, “the division bench consisting of Atul Chandurkar justice and Justice GN Sanap.
“Even if it is assumed, for the sake of argument, there are some other people who depend on the Father, the child must be his first priority in maintenance issues.
If he fails to share maintenance and expenses, then the mother will be asked to bear unnecessary burden,” the bench added , while asking my father to improve monthly maintenance to Rs 7,500 from Rs 5,000, with the effect of October 27, 2015, the date in which students have submitted a request.
The young man, scored 93% in the class X exam, has moved HC after he found it difficult to pay the course fees at IIT Dhanbad.
Until now, education and other expenses were shown by his mother, while his father used to pay Rs 5,000 a month, as stipulated by the court.
The applicant has prayed to improve maintenance to Rs 15,000, so he can pay tuition fees.
“It was seen that the applicant, who happened to be a child contributed, had been made to face this unfavorable situation.
Considering his circumstances and needs, he was limited to dropping the judicial door,” said the judges.
Parents are given divorce on July 21, 2009, through joint agreement.
The Petitioner argued that his father, the teacher at Zilla Parishad school, did not bother maintaining it or treated his welfare, after his birth.
On the other hand, his mother faced difficulties while carrying him with his little salary, the petition said.