Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court recently observed that children have a fundamental right to pursue their education, for which the parents could be compelled to provide necessary funds within the limit of their financial resources.

Dealing with a matter related to maintenance, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan told a daughter not to return Rs 43 lakh paid by her father to pursue her education in Ireland, as she had a right to retain the amount.

We are of the considered view that Rs 43,00,000 is an amount to which respondent no 2 (daughter) was entitled to in law. She, being the daughter, has an indefeasible, legally enforceable, lawful, and legitimate right to secure educational expenses from her parents. All that we observe is that the daughter has a fundamental right to pursue her education, for which the parents could be compelled to provide necessary funds within the limit of their financial resources," the bench observed.

The daughter had declined to return the amount, which had been paid following a settlement between her parents, who had been living separately for 26 years. The court noted that the father’s financial capability allowed him to provide this assistance without hardship, reinforcing her entitlement to retain the funds.

"Respondent No 2 has, thus, got a right to retain that amount. She need not, therefore, return that amount either to the appellant (mother) or to respondent No 1, and may suitably appropriate it as she may deem fit," the bench said.

The matter related to an appeal by the wife against a Madhya Pradesh High Court order dated July 10, 2023, which partially allowed her plea for increased maintenance from her husband. The High Court had raised her monthly maintenance from Rs 5,000 to Rs 7,000, following an earlier Family Court order that increased it from Rs 3,000 to Rs 5,000.

The appellant-wife argued that her husband earned a monthly salary of Rs 84,463 and that the maintenance granted was insufficient, especially as their daughter, born from the marriage, had been living with her.

To resolve disputes, the Supreme Court referred the parties to the Mediation Centre at the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench. A settlement agreement was reached on November 28, 2024, with the husband agreeing to pay Rs 73 lakh in total — Rs 30 lakh to the appellant-wife and Rs 43 lakh to their daughter.

"As regard to the appellant wife, since she has already received the agreed amount of Rs 30,00,000 and the parties are admittedly living separately for the last 26 years, we see no reason not to entertain their prayer for grant of a decree of divorce by mutual consent," the bench said.

Consequently, the court invoked its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and dissolved the marriage of the parties by granting a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Furthermore, court directed the parties to cease pursuing any legal action against each other and declared that all pending cases stand resolved in accordance with the settlement. It further ordered that neither party shall raise claims against the other in the future.

Case Title: Neelima Choure Vs Vijay Choure & Anr