First and foremost, I would like to thank my lecturer for Family Law, Mr. Piumal Fernando (Attorney At Law) who has shown the attitude and the substance of a genius: he continually and persuasively conveyed a spirit of adventure in regard to research and scholarship, and an excitement in regard to teaching. Without his supervision and constant help this dissertation would not have been possible. He inspired me greatly to work in this assignment. I also would like to thank my parents and friends who gave me tremendous support through this assignment. Besides, I would like to thank the staff members of British College and Applied Studies for providing me with a good environment and facilities to complete this assignment.…show more content… Therefore, they are obviously governed under the Roman-Dutch law for maintenance. The people who are governed by the general law are subject to maintenance. Before touching the concept maintenance, should look in to the fact that how the husband, Karunanidhi has dismissed the common house hold by leaving his matrimonial house and live with his parents. He informed the land lord that he had vacated the house rented by him. So according to Roman-Dutch law it is said that “If the husband was responsible for the breakup or was the guilty party then he should provide the maintenance for the family”. Obviously in the scenario, husband could be consider as the guilty party, since it is his duty to maintain a good relationship with his wife and as well as to protect the legal rights of the matrimonial relationship. If the wife had left the matrimonial house then the scenario could have been different.
The maintenance ordinance No: 19 of 1889 including amendments section 3 says that, wife is not entitled to claim maintenance from her husband if she was,
Living in adultery.
Without any sufficient reason refused to live with her…show more content… This was emphasized in the case, Sivapakiam Vs Sivapakiam (1934) the court held that, the term sufficient income means the actual income as well as income that could be earned from possible avenues. If a husband proves that he is unable to do any job, lack of employment will not be considered as a good defense and he is not absolved from the duty of paying