Overview
- Justice Kauser Edappagath dismissed the Malappuram son’s revision and sustained the family court’s award to his 60-year-old mother.
- The court interpreted Section 144(1)(d) of the BNSS as a standalone entitlement for parents, distinct from a wife’s claim under Section 144(1)(a).
- Claims that the father, a fisherman, was maintaining the mother or that she could earn by rearing cattle were rejected as legally irrelevant and morally unacceptable.
- The bench held that a son cannot avoid supporting aged parents by citing overseas employment or obligations to his own nuclear family.
- Related reporting noted a Nagpur bench Bombay High Court view that seniors need not live with abusive children to receive maintenance.