Showing posts with label major son or daughter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label major son or daughter. Show all posts

Saturday, 9 June 2018

Whether a major child is entitled to get maintenance under domestic violence Act?

The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out definition of a
“child” as contained in section 2 (b) of the Act in order to submit that a
“child” means any person below the age of eighteen years and includes any
adopted, step or foster child. Reliance is placed on the decision of this Court
in the case of Shri Rajendra D. Seth Vs. Rekha Jha @ Rekha R. Seth
(2016) ALL MR (Cri) 1506, in which this Court has held that a child who is
major in age would not be entitled for maintenance.
4. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner it is apparent that the
impugned order which is passed under section 20 of the Act cannot be
sustained. Section 20 of the Act provides for a monetary relief to meet the
expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child
of the aggrieved person as a result of the domestic violence. As noticed
earlier, a “child” within the meaning of section 2(b) of the Act means any
person below the age of 18 years. It is apparent from the record that the
second respondent has attained majority and thus cannot be said to be a
“child” within the meaning of section 2 (b) of the Act. A similar view has
been taken by this Court in the case of Shri Rajendra D. Seth (supra). In
that view of the matter the petition is allowed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 23 OF 2018
 Mr. Antonio De Matos Sequeira Almeida,
 Vs
Mrs. Felicidade Wilma Almeida,

CORAM: C. V. BHADANG, J.
 DATE: 4th June, 2018.
Print Page

Friday, 1 May 2015

Whether father is liable to maintain his major son or daughter who are unable to maintain themselves?


 Nanak Chand vs. Chandra Kishore Agarwal (AIR
1970 SC 446) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held
that
the word “child” in Section 488 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898 did not mean a minor son or
daughter and that the real limitation was contained in
the expression “unable to maintain itself”. Irrespective
of whether a son or daughter was a major or minor, a
father was bound to maintain the son or daughter if
such son or daughter was unable to maintain himself
or herself.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.676 OF 2013

Ankush s/o Sheshrao Wayal,
Vs
Sau. Ranjana w/o Ankush Wayal

Date of pronouncing the judgment : 13/10/2014

CORAM :     P.N. DESHMUKH, J. 
  
 DATED  :    OCTOBER 13,  2014 
Citation; 2015 ALLMR(cri)1560
Print Page