The Madras High Court holds that a wife is entitled to maintenance even if the marriage was not legal.

The Petitioner in a revision petition had moved the Madras High Court assailing the order of maintenance passed by the family court. The Petitioner husband has denied the marriage and also paternity to the minor child.

According to the respondent wife the petitioner had started to avoid her and had also asked for 25 lakhs as dowry. As per the respondent wife the petitioner was very well equipped to pay her the maintenance while the petitioner husband had denied that he was married to the respondent wife and also that he had any child borne out of the wedlock.

The High Court observed that:

"As rightly observed by the learned trial Judge, the respondent's deliberate cheating and fraudulent intention can very well be gathered from the stand of the respondent that he did know the first petitioner before filing of the maintenance case and that there was no relationship between him and the petitioners."

"This Court is of the clear view that for the purpose of Section 125 Cr PC, the first petitioner can very well be considered as wife and the second petitioner as the son of the respondent. Hence, the finding of the trial Court that the petitioners are entitled to get maintenance from the respondent cannot be found fault with,"

Loyola Selva Kumar v Sharon Nisha