Bench: Justice G.L. Oza and M.M. Dutt.
Facts:
The Appellant is a medical practitioner at Kalyan, District Thane daughter of Kashiroa rajaram Sawai Respondent by his first wife. The respondent remarried after Appellant’s mother deceased. The Respondent was unable to maintain himself and filed an applpication claiming maintenance from the Appellant. The Appellant filed an appeal by special leave in the Appellate court aggrieved by the order passed by lower courts.
Appellant’s Contention:
The Appellant submitted that under clause (d) of Section 125(1) a father is not entitled to claim maintenance from his daughter whether married or not.
It was also submitted by the appellant that the meaning of the pronoun ‘he’ under Clause (d) of Section 125(1) CrPC indicates
that the son is only burdened with the obligation to maintain his parents.
Issues:
Whether daughter is liable to pay maintenance to parents?
Whether the obligation to take care of parents is only of 'son'?
Findings:
In the present case the Supreme Court held that the daughter is liable to pay maintenance to parents. It was concluded by the court that a liability on both the son and the daughter to maintain their father or mother who is unable to maintain himself or herself, Clause (d) has used the expression "his father or mother" but, in our opinion, the use of the word 'his' does not exclude the parents claiming maintenance from their daughter. Section 2(y) Cr.P.C. provides that words and expressions used herein and not defined but defined in the Indian Penal Code have the meanings respectively assigned to them in that Code.
