Hearing a matrimonial dispute, the Supreme Court recently observed that a “daughter will also have to play a role as a daughter if she is expecting the father to support her education,” after it was informed that she had refused to meet him.
A bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh was hearing an appeal filed by the man challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court order, which set aside the decree passed by the matrimonial court allowing a petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce.
Noting that mediation between the couple was not successful, it said: “Learned counsel for the parties submit that another effort may be made to mediate with the physical presence of the parties.”
Senior advocate Nidhesh Gupta, representing the husband, submitted before the bench that the daughter had declined to meet his client. “She does not even see him on video calls My Lord,” submitted Gupta. He added that if the daughter expects her father to take care of her education and marriage expenses, then it cannot be a one-way street.
At this, the top court said: “The daughter must also appreciate that if she is expecting the father/appellant to support her education, she will also have to play a role as a daughter. The matter be again placed before the Supreme Court mediation Centre.”
The top court had earlier directed the father to pay the education expenses of the 20-year-old daughter.
It has listed the matter for further directions on February 22.
“The mediator will make arrangements for exclusive interaction between the father and the daughter,” said the bench in its order.
(With inputs from IANS)