Read Time: 05 minutes
The husband argued that the wife could still undertake the journey to Vasai, which she had been attending until now. He further stated that if necessary, he was ready and willing to bear the expenses incurred by her to travel the said distance
The Bombay High Court recently imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on a husband who opposed his wife's petition to transfer the maintenance plea from Vasai to Bandra.
A single-judge bench of the high court, comprising Justice Milind Jadhav, was hearing the transfer petition filed by the wife, who contended that the 8-hour round trip required to attend court hearings was causing hardship to her and their daughter.
The wife submitted that her 15-month-old daughter was born prematurely, is still physically weak, and requires regular and constant medication, which incurs substantial costs.
She also stated that her mother is elderly and in poor health, making her unable to provide care and support for the minor daughter if left behind.
The husband argued that the wife could still undertake the journey to Vasai, which she had been attending until now. He further stated that if necessary, he was ready and willing to bear the expenses incurred by her to travel the said distance.
The high court while allowing the transfer petition recorded that, “If Applicant - wife has to travel alongwith her infant / minor daughter, it would be all the more difficult for her to travel, since boarding and alighting from the local train on the western railway corridor at any given time during the day is an extremely difficult proposition considering that trains are overcrowded at all times. While undertaking the train journey, Applicant - wife would have to take care of her infact / minor daughter which would add to her degree of difficulty,” the order reads.
The high court also observed that the husband did not take into account the fact that the wife is required to support and care for her 15-month-old infant/minor daughter while also having to attend the proceedings in the Vasai Court.
“..husband is having three salons in Vasai and is rather earning very well. Financially, Respondent - husband is therefore well off. Merely due to that reason, Respondent - husband cannot insist that he will bear the travel cost of the Applicant – wife to attend the proceedings in Marriage Petition in Vasai. The submission made by Mr. Tripathi is without consideration of the Applicant’s case altogether. Not once has Mr. Tripathi considered the fact that the Applicant - wife is required to support and care for her 15 month old infant / minor daughter and if she is to attend the proceedings in Vasai Court, how and who would take care of the child in her absence,” the order reads.
Please Login or Register
