A housewife too is busy, can’t deny her airfare: HC
Vasantha.Kumar@timesgroup.com
Bengaluru: 02.05.2018
Observing that husbands who think homemakers have a lot of free time don’t quite understand their work, the Karnataka high court rejected a Bengaluru man’s petition challenging a family court order directing him to pay his estranged wife’s travel expenses. The court said a “housewife is as busy as a professional”.
Gaurav Raj Jain had said she was a homemaker and had free time to travel by train instead of taking a flight to attend hearings of their divorce case at a Bengaluru family court. The high court ordered him to bear the flight expenses.
Stating that his contention is “misplaced and even shows a lack of gender justice”, the high court said a husband cannot decide the mode of transportation his wife takes to attend hearings. “If the wife decided to travel by air and not by train, the husband cannot escape his liability to pay the requisite expenses,” Justice Raghvendra S Chauhan observed.
Gaurav had challenged a February 1, 2018 order of a family court directing him to pay ₹32,114 as travelling expenses to his wife Shweta Jain, who lives in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, towards travel expenses for attending the hearing on November 3, 2017 and February 1, 2018.
Gaurav’s counsel claimed since Shweta was a housemaker, she was free to travel by train but travelled by air and this doesn’t fit into “requisite expenditure” as mentioned by the Supreme Court.
The court said: “A large number of people continue to carry a misnomer that a housewife is ‘free’. Needless to say, a housewife is as busy as a professional person. After all, she is responsible for looking after members of family and for running the house. To look after the members of family and to run the house is not an easy task,” Justice Chauhan observed in his order passed on April 26.
Gaurav and Shweta married in Meerut on June 30, 2009. In March 2016, Shweta filed a complaint against her husband and in-laws and later a petition seeking divorce. In the meantime, Gaurav filed a divorce petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriages Act against Shweta on grounds of cruelty and desertion.
Since Gaurav filed the divorce petition in Bengaluru and she lived in Muzaffarnagar, Shweta moved the Supreme Court with a transfer application. On July 10, 2017, the apex court dismissed her application but observed that she can claim “requisite expenditure” when she has to travel to Bengaluru for hearings.
Shweta filed an application before the family court and placed documents claiming ₹32,114 as travel expenses for attending the court on two days (in November 2017 and February 2018). The family court allowed her application and directed Gaurav to pay the travel expenses. The high court also noted that the apex court “has not limited the requisite expenditure merely to train travel.”
Vasantha.Kumar@timesgroup.com
Bengaluru: 02.05.2018
Observing that husbands who think homemakers have a lot of free time don’t quite understand their work, the Karnataka high court rejected a Bengaluru man’s petition challenging a family court order directing him to pay his estranged wife’s travel expenses. The court said a “housewife is as busy as a professional”.
Gaurav Raj Jain had said she was a homemaker and had free time to travel by train instead of taking a flight to attend hearings of their divorce case at a Bengaluru family court. The high court ordered him to bear the flight expenses.
Stating that his contention is “misplaced and even shows a lack of gender justice”, the high court said a husband cannot decide the mode of transportation his wife takes to attend hearings. “If the wife decided to travel by air and not by train, the husband cannot escape his liability to pay the requisite expenses,” Justice Raghvendra S Chauhan observed.
Gaurav had challenged a February 1, 2018 order of a family court directing him to pay ₹32,114 as travelling expenses to his wife Shweta Jain, who lives in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, towards travel expenses for attending the hearing on November 3, 2017 and February 1, 2018.
Gaurav’s counsel claimed since Shweta was a housemaker, she was free to travel by train but travelled by air and this doesn’t fit into “requisite expenditure” as mentioned by the Supreme Court.
The court said: “A large number of people continue to carry a misnomer that a housewife is ‘free’. Needless to say, a housewife is as busy as a professional person. After all, she is responsible for looking after members of family and for running the house. To look after the members of family and to run the house is not an easy task,” Justice Chauhan observed in his order passed on April 26.
Gaurav and Shweta married in Meerut on June 30, 2009. In March 2016, Shweta filed a complaint against her husband and in-laws and later a petition seeking divorce. In the meantime, Gaurav filed a divorce petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriages Act against Shweta on grounds of cruelty and desertion.
Since Gaurav filed the divorce petition in Bengaluru and she lived in Muzaffarnagar, Shweta moved the Supreme Court with a transfer application. On July 10, 2017, the apex court dismissed her application but observed that she can claim “requisite expenditure” when she has to travel to Bengaluru for hearings.
Shweta filed an application before the family court and placed documents claiming ₹32,114 as travel expenses for attending the court on two days (in November 2017 and February 2018). The family court allowed her application and directed Gaurav to pay the travel expenses. The high court also noted that the apex court “has not limited the requisite expenditure merely to train travel.”
No comments:
Post a Comment