Kochi: The Kerala High Court has made it clear that courts need not consider factors like law and religion while granting alimony with a retrospective effect to parents by their children.
A Division Bench comprising Justices A Mohammed Mushtaq and Sophy Thomas said that alimony with retrospective effect cannot be denied just because it is not specially mentioned in the law.
The High Court verdict came while settling the appeal filed by an 80-year-old father from Malappuram belonging to the Christian religion. The octogenarian filed the appeal after his petition in the family court in Malappuram seeking alimony with retrospective effect from the children was rejected by the court. The family court's verdict was based on its finding that there was no provision in the law to grant alimony with a retrospective effect.
The lower court said that the Indian Christian Marriage Act does not even refer to giving alimony to a wife or children. The court was also weighed down by the fact that alimony with retrospective effect was not referred to in the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure) nor in the Act covering the welfare and sustenance of senior citizens.
However, the High Court felt that the principles of law were being formed on the basis of the customs, culture, and traditions followed by society. Hence, the societal living system based on the faith followed by the parties in the case can be considered. In the ten commandments in the Bible, it is directed to respect parents. Even though it can be said that the protection of senior citizens in advanced age is the state's responsibility, the children cannot ignore their responsibility in this regard, especially in the present social structure. If we can legally claim the expenses of life with prospective effect, the same can also be claimed with retrospective effect. Parents with self-respect may hesitate to approach courts with the hope and faith that their children will meet their needs.
Such self-respect, patience, and love cannot be exploited to deny the alimony that is due to them with retrospective effect, the court said.
The Division Bench also struck down the order of the lower court and returned the case to the family court. The High Court also directed that the respondents in the case should appear before the family court in person and the court should pronounce its verdict in two months.
