Year Ender 2025 | Legal News — In a significant judgment reinforcing the rights of elderly parents, the Kerala High Court has ruled that a mother is entitled to claim maintenance from her son even if her husband is alive and providing support. The court made it clear that a child’s legal and moral responsibility toward parents does not end simply because the spouse is present or contributing financially.
The ruling came while dismissing a revision petition filed by a man working in the Gulf, who had challenged an earlier order passed by a Family Court directing him to pay monthly maintenance to his mother. The decision has been widely viewed as an important step in strengthening the legal framework for senior citizens’ welfare in India.
The case was initiated by a 60-year-old woman who approached the Family Court seeking a monthly maintenance of ₹25,000 from her son, who is employed abroad. In her petition, the mother stated that she had no regular source of income and was dependent on others to meet her daily and essential expenses. Although her husband was alive, she argued that she was not financially secure and required support from her son.
After examining the evidence and circumstances, the Family Court partially allowed her plea and directed the son to pay ₹5,000 per month as maintenance. Unhappy with this order, the son challenged the decision before the Kerala High Court.
The son opposed his mother’s claim on several grounds. He argued that his mother earned sufficient income through animal husbandry and was not entirely dependent on others. He also pointed out that her husband worked as a fisherman and owned a fishing boat, suggesting that the household had adequate means for survival.
Additionally, the petitioner stated that his mother was already being taken care of by her husband and that placing a financial obligation on him would be unfair, especially since he had his own family responsibilities, including a wife and a child. On these grounds, he sought to set aside the Family Court’s order.
The Kerala High Court, however, rejected the son’s arguments and upheld the Family Court’s ruling. Justice Kauser Edappagath, who presided over the case, made crucial observations regarding the scope of maintenance laws and a child’s duty toward parents.
The court clarified that a woman’s right to seek maintenance from her son or daughter is independent of her husband’s obligation to support her. Even if the husband is alive and providing some level of care, that alone does not take away the mother’s legal right to claim maintenance from her children.
The bench emphasized that if a mother is unable to maintain herself or if her husband is not providing adequate support, the responsibility shifts to the children, both morally and legally. The court stated that caring for elderly parents is not merely a social expectation but a statutory obligation under the law.
The High Court referred to relevant provisions under Indian law, including Section 125(1)(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Section 144(1)(d) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The court observed that the existence of sufficient means with the husband does not extinguish a son’s statutory duty to support his mother when required.
Legal experts also weighed in on the judgment. Advocate Alay Rizvi, Managing Partner at Accord Juris, explained that the mother had filed the maintenance petition under Section 125 of the CrPC, which is meant to prevent destitution and ensure basic financial security for dependents, including parents.
This ruling sends a strong message about the evolving interpretation of maintenance laws in India. It underlines that adult children cannot evade responsibility toward elderly parents by citing the presence of a spouse or partial support from another family member. The judgment reinforces the idea that parents’ welfare is a shared responsibility and that courts will prioritize dignity and survival over technical objections.
As India’s elderly population continues to grow, such decisions play a vital role in ensuring social security for senior citizens. The Kerala High Court’s verdict not only upholds the law but also reinforces ethical family values, making it a landmark decision in matters related to parental maintenance.
Overall, the judgment stands as a reminder that caring for parents is both a legal duty and a moral obligation—one that does not diminish with changing family circumstances.
