<p>The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by the husband challenging the order for payment of Rs 10,000 a month as maintenance, observing that diabetes and related ailments are manageable. “It (the contention) doesn’t merit countenance. A large section of people all over the world suffer from such ailments and with advancement of medical science, all that is manageable. It is not the case of the petitioner that the same are not manageable with proper medical care,” Justice Krishna S Dixit said.</p>.<p>The petitioner, a resident of Bengaluru, had challenged the order passed by a family court in Shivamogga on April 21. The court had directed him to pay Rs 10,000 per month as maintenance to his wife, residing in Shivamogga with their son. He said his wife is gainfully employed and therefore, does not need maintenance. It was claimed that he is suffering from diabetes and related ailments and hence, not capable of making payment periodically, terming it to be excess.</p>.<p>Justice Dixit noted that law, religion and justice require an able bodied man to look after his dependent family and that is how Parliament has enacted several legislations, CrPC section 125, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act), Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, etc. “The submission that Rs 10,000 per month is far in excess of what is required needs to be outrightly rejected, regard being to costly days of life and that the respondent (wife) has to hold souls and bodies of herself and the growing child. The contention that petitioner has been suffering from diabetes and related ailment does not merit countenance,” the court said.</p>
<p>The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by the husband challenging the order for payment of Rs 10,000 a month as maintenance, observing that diabetes and related ailments are manageable. “It (the contention) doesn’t merit countenance. A large section of people all over the world suffer from such ailments and with advancement of medical science, all that is manageable. It is not the case of the petitioner that the same are not manageable with proper medical care,” Justice Krishna S Dixit said.</p>.<p>The petitioner, a resident of Bengaluru, had challenged the order passed by a family court in Shivamogga on April 21. The court had directed him to pay Rs 10,000 per month as maintenance to his wife, residing in Shivamogga with their son. He said his wife is gainfully employed and therefore, does not need maintenance. It was claimed that he is suffering from diabetes and related ailments and hence, not capable of making payment periodically, terming it to be excess.</p>.<p>Justice Dixit noted that law, religion and justice require an able bodied man to look after his dependent family and that is how Parliament has enacted several legislations, CrPC section 125, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act), Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, etc. “The submission that Rs 10,000 per month is far in excess of what is required needs to be outrightly rejected, regard being to costly days of life and that the respondent (wife) has to hold souls and bodies of herself and the growing child. The contention that petitioner has been suffering from diabetes and related ailment does not merit countenance,” the court said.</p>