Patricia Pauline A/P Mariasoosay v Ravendran A/L Ramasamy (BA-33-493-07/2022)

the RH to bear all costs of education of the 2 daughters until 1 they have completed their first degree. The PW will disclose 2 invoice from the College/University and the RH shall pay the 3 amount as specified on the invoice within 7 days from the date 4 of notification; 5

the RH to continue paying for the insurance premiums 7 belonging to the two daughters and the PW; 8

the RH to pay interim maintenance of RM5000 per month to 10 the PW until the issuance of the Decree Nisi; 11

the RH to continue to pay instalments for the housing loan, 13 pay all expenses for maintenance of the matrimonial home. 14 The PW and the children are to continue residing in the 15 matrimonial home until the Decree Nisi is granted. The RH is 16 to move out of the Sunway House i.e. the matrimonial home 17 immediately; 18

RH to bear the costs of this application; and 20

any other relief deemed fit and fair to the PW and the children. 22 23 Background Facts 24 [2] The PW and the Respondent Husband (RH) were legally married 25 on 31.3.2001. They have two (2) daughters who are aged 20 and 17 26 respectively. 27 28 [3] The RH is a pilot with Singapore Airlines. 29 30 [4] The PW, a former air stewardess with Singapore Airlines became a 1 full time home maker after the marriage. 2 3 [5] In the early days of their marriage they lived in Singapore but from 4 April 2004 they reside in their matrimonial home in Bandar Sunway 5 Petaling Jaya, Selangor. The RH commutes between Kuala Lumpur and 6 Singapore for work. 7 8 [6] It is undisputed that the RH was the sole breadwinner and he was 9 responsible for all expenses of the family, including investment of assets, 10 procuring of movable and immobile assets and generally responsible for 11 all financial aspects. 12 13 [7] The PW assumed the primary role of caring for the family looking 14 after the children full time as well as maintaining the upkeep of the 15 matrimonial home. 16 17 [8] After the PW started her teaching career sometime in 2016 the RH 18 continued to be the sole provider of the family as the PW’s salary of 19 RM900 as a primary school teacher was barely enough. However her 20 position as teacher in Taylors International School enabled the family to 21 save 50% of the school fees payable for their two children. The PW now 22 earns a net salary of RM4900.00. 23 24 [9] The eldest daughter is currently pursuing her First Year studies in 25 RMIT University Melbourne, Australia while the younger daughter is 26 pursuing her “A” Levels at Taylors College Bandar Sunway. 27 28 [10] According to the PW the marriage has irretrievably broken down as 29 she claims that she has suffered physical and emotional abuse at the 30 hands of the RH. The RH states that it is the unreasonable behavior of the 1 PW that led to the breakdown of the marriage in addition to his discovery 2 of the PW having an adulterous relationship with the Named Party. 3 4 [11] The PW filed a divorce petition in July 2022 and the RH has cross- 5 petition for the same. 6 7 [12] The PW still lives at the matrimonial home and the RH will stay there 8 whenever he is on leave. 9 10 [13] On October 2023 the PW filed this application. After careful 11 consideration of the evidence, the submissions of both parties and after 12 interviewing them, I allowed the application with some modification. 13 14 [14] These are my reasons for allowing the application. 15 16 Contentions of the Parties and Decision of the Court 17 [15] In his Affidavit in Reply (AIR) dated 6.11.2023 (Encl 71) the RH does 18 not deny that he has the primary obligation and responsibility to maintain 19 his children. He reaffirms his love for his children and is ready, willing and 20 undertakes full responsibility to paying for both the children’s entire 21 education expenses including their school/college/university fess, tuition 22 fees, maintenance fees and all other reasonable expenses. 23 24 [16] The RH has listed out the expenses incurred by him in supporting 25 his children financially. This can be found in Paragraph 22 of his AIR (Encl 26 71). 27 28 [17] He states he has consistently made direct payments either to both 29 children or to through their respective university/schools/insurance 30 company. He avers that he has never at any point in time failed to make 1 any of those payments. On top of that he has never failed to provide extra 2 financial support whenever the children approached him for more money. 3 4 [18] Hence he believes that the maintenance he has provided is more 5 than sufficient and there is no necessity for him to channel those 6 payments through the PW to the children. 7 8 [19] As a husband to the PW, the RH states he has paid and will continue 9 to pay monthly maintenance of RM1000 to RM1500 to support the PW for 10 her essential needs and expenses in maintaining the matrimonial home. 11 He believes this amount is sufficient bearing in mind the PW receives 12 additional income from the rental collected from their condominium in 13 Penang. 14 15 [20] The RH has contended that the PW’s claim for RM5000 as spousal 16 maintenance is excessive and unjustified and driven by greed bearing in 17 mind that she is currently employed as a teacher and earns a reasonable 18 income each month. The RH alluded to the fact that he had in the past 19 paid for her educational expenses during her pursuit of her diploma and 20 Master’s Degree. 21 22 [21] He states that he discontinued making payments for her yearly 23 insurance premiums as the PW herself had explicitly informed him that 24 she would pay for it herself. He finds it absurd for the PW to now demand 25 that he pay for her insurance and other expenses when she herself had 26 clearly expressed her desire to bear those expenses herself. 27 28 [22] The RH disputes the PW’s averment of having to bear the costs and 29 expenses from her own pocket to maintain the matrimonial home as he 30 asserts that the maintenance of the home has been routinely and 1 systematically carried out on a predetermined schedule under his 2 supervision. 3 4 [23] In any event the RH contends that he lacks the financial means to 5 meet the additional demand put forth by the PW in her application bearing 6 in mind the expenditures he has incurred which he outlined in paragraph 7 22 of his AIR. He contends that her claim for spousal maintenance of 8 RM5000 is clearly for what she wants and not what she needs. 9 10 [24] The RH submits that it is absurd on the part of the PW to demand 11 that the RH move out of the matrimonial home immediately as this is the 12 home in Malaysia he returns to from work in Singapore. Furthermore, he 13 inherited this house from his late father. 14 15 [25] The PW in her AIS (Encl 69) has given her reasons for the 16 application. She maintains that their elder daughter needs RM3000 (or 17 AUD 1200) as she has considerable expenses to be paid living as a 18 foreign student in Australia. The PW has exhibited the expenses incurred 19 by the elder daughter in paragraph 11 of the AIS. The receipts exhibited 20 clearly show the expenses incurred. The PW avers that those expenses 21 are the minimum expenses needed for an international student. The elder 22 daughter ought not be forced to look for a part-time job to pay for her other 23 expenses. 24 25 [26] As for the 2nd daughter the PW acknowledges that the RH has 26 agreed to pay RM1500 for her expenses but nevertheless complains that 27 his payments are sporadic and inconsistent. She has pointed out that the 28 RH only paid RM1500 from October 2022 until February 2023 and 29 thereafter he reverted to paying only RM1000 each month. He promised 30 that he would pay RM500 per month directly but thus far he has not done 1 so. Instead he paid only RM350 per month directly to the 2nd daughter. 2 The PW argues that this sum barely covers her daily expenses as a 3 college going student here in the city. 4 5 [27] The PW has requested for the payments for the children be made 6 through her in order that she could monitor their expenses and ensure that 7 the children did not have to worry about their finances and they can be left 8 to concentrate on their studies. While she acknowledged that the RH 9 makes some payments for the 2 children there is no certainty or 10 consistency of amounts nor dates. She claimed that this stressed the 11 children out not knowing whether the payment would come through in 12 time. The PW contends that the RH deliberately does this as a means to 13 wield control over the children. She states that the payments materialize 14 only after he berates them for wasting money and issues ultimatums to 15 them to find a part time job if they felt the money he gave them was not 16 enough. She contends that the constant barraging greatly affected the 17 children and argued that they ought not to be bullied into accepting the 18 meagre sum that the RH grudgingly gives them. 19 20 [28] Contrary to the RH’s assertions the PW maintains that she and the 21 Children live a very moderate lifestyle and have not demanded for 22 unreasonable and unjustified expenses. This is reflected in the particulars 23 of her claim. 24 25 [29] In regard to her claim for spousal maintenance the PW has 26 highlighted the fact that the RH had previously maintained and fully 27 supported her and the Children throughout their 22 years of marriage and 28 hence he should continue to do so in spite of her receipt of income as a 29 teacher. The PW claims that the RH had resorted to cutting off all 30 payments immediately after she filed the divorce petition. He has not paid 1 for the upkeep and maintenance of the matrimonial home and the PW is 2 forced to upkeep it to be best of her abilities. 3 4 [30] The PW has alleged that the RH had vindictively meddled with the 5 engine of the 9 year old Proton car she uses resulting in inconvenience 6 and more expenses having to use e-hailing services to commute to and 7 from school and work for her and the 2nd daughter. 8 9 Decision of the Court 10 [31] The instant application in Encl 68 is made pursuant to Rule 56 of the 11 Divorce and Matrimonial Proceedings Rules 1980 (DMPR) seeking inter 12 alia maintenance pending suit which includes maintenance for spouse 13 and the children of the marriage. 14 15 Maintenance for the 2 Children 16 [32] It is trite law that every parent has the duty to maintain his or her 17 child, regardless of who has custody. 18 19 [33] The power to make maintenance orders for children is set out in 20 Section 93 of the LRA 1976. It expressly states that it is the man’s 21 obligation to provide financial support for the benefit of his child : 22 23 “Power for court to order maintenance for children 24

The court may at any time order a man to pay maintenance for 25 the benefit of his child - 26

if he has refused or neglected reasonably to provide for the child;

if he has deserted his wife and the child is in her charge;

during the pendency of any matrimonial proceedings; or 29

when making or subsequent to the making of an order placing the 30 child in the custody of any other person. 31

The Court shall have the corresponding power to order a woman to 1 pay or contribute towards the maintenance of her child where it is 2 satisfied that having regard to her means it is reasonable so to order.” 3 4 [34] Section 92 of the LRA 1976 provides for the assessment of 5 maintenance for children and it states : 6 7 “Except where an agreement or order of court otherwise provides, it shall 8 be the duty of a parent to maintain or contribute to the maintenance of 9 his or her children, whether they are in his or her custody or the custody 10 of any other person, either by providing them with such accommodation, 11 clothing, food and education as may be reasonable having regard to 12 his or her means and station in life or by paying the costs thereof.” 13 14 [35] It is the primary obligation of the father to maintain the children. He 15 must ensure that the maintenance provided is no less than that of the 16 standard of living the children were accustomed to during the subsistence 17 of the marriage. 18 19 [36] In Sivajothi a/p K Suppiah v Kunathasan a/l Chelliah [2000] 6 20 MLJ 48 it was observed as follows : 21 22 “Moreover, it is settled law that it is the duty of the father to maintain the 23 standard of living the children had enjoyed in the past, i.e. during the 24 existence of the marriage.” 25 26 [37] The Court of Appeal repeated this observation in the case of GGC 27 v CCC & HMY [2016] 1 LNS 885 where it referred with approval to the 28 case of Sivajothi and held as follows : 29 30 “Maintenance signify any form of material provision that will enable an 31 adult to live a normal life and a child to be brought up properly. Thus 32 maintenance cannot mean only mere subsistence, i.e., the food she 1 puts in her mouth but also means the clothes on her back, the 2 house in which she lives and the money which she has to have in 3 her pocket, all of which vary according to the means of the man who 4 leaves a wife behind. Moreover, it is settled law that it is the duty of 5 the father to maintain the standard of living the children had 6 enjoyed in the past, i.e., during the existence of the marriage." 7 (emphasis added) 8 9 [38] In Parkunan Achulingam v Kalaiyarasy Periasamy [2004] 7 CLJ 10 175 the learned Judge considered what constituted “maintenance” and 11 held : 12 13 “The term “maintenance” used in ss 77 and 92 of the LRA aforesaid 14 should be construed widely as it signifies any form of material provision 15 that will enable the wife and children to be placed in a position to enjoy 16 the same standard of living as they did during the existence of the 17 marriage.” 18 19 [39] I have no doubt that the RH is committed to his duty as a father to 20 provide for both the education and daily needs of the 2 children and that 21 he will not do anything to avoid his statutory responsibilities. Indeed, he 22 has given his assurance that he is ready and willing to continue to provide 23 financial support to the two children. He has pledged should the children 24 need extra allowances all that they had to do was to was approach him 25 and ask. He clarified that in the past he had never failed to provide them 26 with extra financial support whenever they asked him. 27 28 [40] There is no dispute that the RH is currently paying the 1st daughter’s 29 university fees, her insurance and rental for her accommodations. Over 30 and above that he gives her a monthly allowance of AUD 400.00. 31 [41] As for the 2nd daughter who is studying at Taylors College the 1 documentary evidence speaks for itself. Although the RH claims he has 2 been giving RM1500.00 for the 2nd daughter’s expenses, he has defaulted 3 in paying for the months of June, August and October 2023 and for the 4 other months he has only transferred the sum of RM1000 to her instead 5 of RM1500.00 as promised. On other months she has received RM350.00 6 only from him. 7 8 [42] It is worthy to note that the elder daughter has already attained the 9 age of 18 years but she has not completed her degree. In this situation 10 reference is made to Section 95 of the LRA 1976 which reads as follows: 11 12 Section 95 – Duration of orders for custody and maintenance 13 Except where an order for custody or maintenance of a child is 14 expressed to be for any shorter period or where any such order has been 15 rescinded, it shall expire on the attainment by the child of the age of 16 eighteen years or where the child is under physical or mental disability, 17 or is pursuing further or higher education or training, on the ceasing 18 of such disability or completion of such further or higher education or 19 training, whichever is the later. 20 21 [43] At the moment the RH is paying an allowance of AUD400 to the 1st 22 daughter and RM400 for the 2nd daughter. In my view that amount is 23 unjustified and insufficient for the 2 girls who are 20 and 17 years old 24 respectively. I tend to agree that the sum of AUD 400 to the 1st daughter 25 is grossly insufficient for her monthly expenses bearing in mind she is 26 living and studying in Australia. I take judicial notice that her expenses as 27 a freshman studying abroad will only increase with the considerable 28 expenses incurred which is not helped by the weak ringgit Malaysia is 29 facing right now. 30 31 [44] The RH himself has implicitly acknowledged that the allowance of 1 AUD 400 given to the eldest daughter is inadequate when he agreed to 2 give her AUD 1000 provided she looks for a part-time job. The RH is 3 clearly aware of her monthly expenses but obdurately refuses to 4 acknowledge the expenses particularized in pages 20 to 63 of the PW’s 5 AIS (Encl 69). 6 7 [45] Similarly, I am of the view that the monthly allowance of RM400 8 given to the 2nd daughter is inequitable and grossly inadequate for a 9 college going student living and studying in the Klang Valley. On this issue 10 I agree with the PW’s contention that the Court is entitled to take judicial 11 cognizance of the fact of the high cost of living in the Klang Valley and 12 personal experience of bringing up children and the costs involved. It goes 13 without saying that the costs of education, food, clothing, utilities and 14 transport for this present times are high and on the rise. 15 16 [46] To my mind the sum of RM400 touted by the RH as being sufficient 17 would barely cover the child’s meals for a week, let alone for a month. 18 Additionally, she needs to spend on transportation to and from college and 19 this has to be factored into her living expenses. 20 21 [47] Although the RH is generous enough to pay for all the educational 22 expenses, he must also ensure that the children are placed in a position 23 to receive enough monthly allowance to maintain a reasonable lifestyle 24 commensurate with their standard of living. 25 26 [48] I must remind the RH of what was postulated in Sivajothi’s case 27 i.e. that he must ensure the children receive not only mere subsistence 28 but rather he must ensure they have enough to eat, transportation to and 29 from their house to the college, clothes for themselves and pocket money 30 to buy food, stationary personal and healthcare necessities which girls of 1 their age will inevitably need to have. There should be some money left 2 over too for entertainment, selfcare and enrichment. 3 4 [49] The RH will not be financially impacted if he were to increase the 5 maintenance provision for the 2 children bearing in mind the RH has been 6 serving 20 years as a pilot with the rank of Captain in Singapore Airlines 7 and earns in Singapore currency. 8 9 [50] I have taken note that the 2 daughters are at crucial stages in their 10 life with their studies. They are on the cusp of adulthood and their needs 11 and expenses will certainly increase. Their parents may be headed in 12 separate ways but this Court will have to ensure that the children’s lifestyle 13 will remain in the way they were accustomed to. The paramount 14 consideration for the Court is to ensure that the best interest and welfare 15 of the 2 children are not compromised. They must be left to concentrate 16 and study in serenity and peace without having to worry about whether 17 they have enough money to get through to the next month. It is not the 18 time for them to be put in the stressful position of looking for a part time 19 job as suggested by their father. As it stands I have no doubt that the 20 matrimonial problems faced by their parents have deeply affected them. 21 Therefore, it would be most appropriate and in their best interest that their 22 lifestyle is as little disturbed as possible and they should continue to enjoy 23 the standard of living that they used to have before their parents went their 24 separate ways. 25 26 [51] After a thorough consideration of the financial situation of the RH 27 and taking into account the reasonable needs of the 2 children I am of the 28 view that the RH shall continue payments of all fees and expenses 29 incurred in relation to both the children. 30 [52] In addition, the RH is ordered to increase the monthly maintenance 1 to RM3000.00 for the eldest child and RM1500 for the youngest child. In 2 my view this amount is reasonable and justified taking into consideration 3 the RH’s means and station in life and the standard of living the Children 4 had enjoyed. 5 6 [53] The RH shall transfer these sums to the PW’s account on or before 7 the 7th of each month in order that she may distribute the money to the 2 8 children accordingly. I have decided that the maintenance for the children 9 shall be paid to them through the PW. She will distribute the money to 10 them since the RH works and lives most of the time in Singapore. It is 11 better for the PW to be put in charge of handling the children’s monthly 12 maintenance as she can be reached at all times, more so as the 2nd 13 daughter lives together with the PW in the same house. In this manner the 14 RH will not be troubled and can concentrate on his job. 15 16 Maintenance for Wife 17 [54] Sections 77 and 78 of the LRA 1976 are the pertinent provisions in 18 regard to the Court’s powers to make orders for spousal maintenance. 19 20 “S. 77 Power of the court to order maintenance of spouse 21

The court may order a man to pay maintenance to his wife or former 22 wife- 23

during the course of any matrimonial proceedings;

when granting or subsequent to the grant of a decree of 25 divorce or judicial separation;

if, after a decree declaring her presumed to be dead, she is 27 found to be alive.

The court shall have the corresponding power to order a woman to 29 pay maintenance to her husband or former husband where he is 30 incapacitated, wholly or partially, from earning a livelihood by reason of 31 mental or physical injury or ill-health, and the court is satisfied that 1 having regard to her means it is reasonable so to order.” 2 3 “S. 78 Assessment of maintenance 4 In determining the amount of maintenance to be paid by a man to his 5 wife or former wife or by a woman to her husband or former husband, 6 the court shall base its assessment primarily on the means and needs 7 of the parties, regardless of the proportion such maintenance bears to 8 the income of the husband or wife as the case may be, but shall have 9 regard to the degree of responsibility which the court apportions to each 10 party for the breakdown of the marriage.” 11 12 [55] In assessing the amount of maintenance, the RH should pay the 13 Court has to take into account the means and needs of the parties. In 14 Sreedevi Naidu T Sree Ramalu Naidu v Eelasegeran T Nadarajah & 15 Anor [2016] 6 CLJ 538 the Court of Appeal addressed the means and 16 needs test as follows : 17 18 “[24] In deciding the amount of maintenance to be awarded to the 19 petitioner wife, the court must take into account the means and 20 needs of the parties. In assessing the means and needs of the parties, 21 the court has always had regard to the following factors :

the duration of the marriage;

(ii) whether there are any children of the marriage, the age of the 24 parties;

(iii) whether the husband had financially supported the wife during 26 the subsistence of the marriage;

(iv) the parties earning capabilities; and 28

whether the divorce would have affected the husband’s position 29 financially (see Koay Cheng Eng v Linda Herawati Santoso [2008] 4 30 CLJ 105 at 116 and 118).” 31 32 [56] The parties in this instant case have been married for a period of 1 about 22 years. The RH himself has stated that he fully supported the PW 2 and the children throughout the duration of the marriage even after the 3 PW started her teaching career during their marriage. 4 5 [57] The RH has admitted to providing the PW with a supplementary 6 credit card and paid her between RM1,500 and RM3000 per month. Apart 7 from that he has paid for her AIA insurance premium and provided her 8 with a car. The credit card is used for the purchase of grocery bills, her 9 personal healthcare, toll, telephone bill, maintenance of the car and petrol 10 bills, dining out, purchase of food and medical expenses for the pet family 11 dog. 12 13 [58] The RH has also admitted that he pays for the installments of the 14 matrimonial home in Bandar Sunway and all other properties. 15 16 [59] I am of the view that I should refrain from making conclusive findings 17 on any conflicting evidence at this stage of the proceedings but should go 18 on instead to consider whether in the circumstances the RH should be 19 ordered to pay a quantifiable amount as spousal maintenance pending 20 the trial. 21 22 [60] I should also refrain from making any conclusions as to the 23 significance of the respective conduct of the parties in contributing to the 24 breakdown of the marriage. Both the RH and the PW have made a number 25 of allegations against each other, all of which remain in dispute. In 26 navigating this chartered course, I find guidance in the case of NEU v 27 NUM & Anor [2023] MLJU 1459 where the learned Judge held as follows: 28 29 “[47] In the current case, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant had made 1 numerous allegations against each other, all of which remain in dispute. 2 Given the contested nature of these allegations, it was my view that it 3 was inappropriate for this Court to assign blame for the breakdown of 4 the marriage at this stage. The determination of responsibility for the 5 breakdown is best suited for the proper hearing of the divorce petition. 6 Consequently, in these interim applications, only the ‘means and needs 7 test’ was considered.” 8 9 [61] I find merit in the RH’s argument that the PW’s claim for RM5000 for 10 herself is rather on the high side and difficult to justify. She has not 11 satisfied or discharged her duty to prove that she needs RM5000 in 12 maintenance. It would appear that the amount claimed is more of ‘means 13 and wants’ and not ‘means and needs’. 14 15 [62] On this note, I have kept in mind that this is an application for interim 16 reliefs only. The PW may produce all her evidence to support her claim 17 for maintenance at the trial proper. Likewise, the RH will have his 18 opportunity to address his ‘means’. 19 20 [63] I have been mindful of the fact that the PW is employed as a teacher 21 and takes home a net monthly salary of RM4,989.60 per month. 22 23 [64] Furthermore, she is not required to pay for any costs or expenses 24 for maintaining the Sunway House. I accept the evidence that the 25 maintenance of the Sunway House is routinely and systematically carried 26 out on a predetermined schedule. In any event it shall be the duty and 27 obligation of the RH to bear the expenses of the maintenance of the 28 Sunway House. 29 30 [65] Be that as it may I took into consideration her contention that her 1 salary alone is insufficient to pay for the household expenses and to 2 support the children and herself. I also took into consideration that very 3 often she had to give the 2nd daughter extra money for her daily expenses. 4 In accordance with trite principles and provisions of law the RH is obliged 5 to provide the same standard of living for the PW and the children before 6 and after their separation. 7 8 [66] In the instant case, my task is quite straightforward. I have taken 9 into consideration paragraph 28 of the RH’s written submissions where he 10 stated that he had consistently provided financial support to the PW by 11 paying either RM1000 or RM1500 per month as her maintenance during 12 their marriage. In paragraph 35.2 thereof the RH further affirms that he 13 has been providing financial support of the said sum even after receiving 14 Encl.

15 16 [67] I have decided to exercise my discretion to order the RH to continue 17 to make that same monthly payment of RM1,500 to the PW. I am of the 18 view that this is a reasonable sum to meet her living expenses until her 19 opportunity to prove her claim for RM5,000 is dealt with at the full trial. 20 21 [68] Taking all the aforesaid into consideration and being always mindful 22 that the Plaintiff’s needs are to be maintained in accordance with the 23 lifestyle that she was accustomed to when living with the Defendant, my 24 assessment is that the sum of RM1,500 which the RH was already paying 25 prior to the filing of Encl 1 is a fair and reasonable sum pending the 26 disposal of the divorce proceedings. 27 28 29 30 Insurance Payments 1 [69] At this juncture, it is crucial to note that the RH had terminated the 2 payment of the insurance premium payments of the PW’s AIA insurance 3 policies. These policies were taken by the RH for the benefit of the PW 4 and children and he had been regularly paying for them. The RH has the 5 means to pay for these insurance payments. The RH’s averment that he 6 has no means to pay those sums is not supported by a shred of evidence. 7 It is very noticeable that he has failed to adduce any evidence to 8 substantiate his claim that he is earning a monthly income of SGD20,000. 9 He has not produced his current pay slips and income tax statements to 10 support his averments. While he has given a breakdown of his personal 11 expenditure and outgoings, yet he has chosen to exhibit sporadic payment 12 slips and receipts. Apart from bank in slips showing payments made to 13 and for the two children and to the PW, there are no other receipts shown 14 for the expenses he claims he has incurred which come up to more than 15 RM80,000. He has chosen not to reveal his personal bank account 16 statements that show his true income and expenditure. I am compelled to 17 find that the RH has failed to make full and frank disclosure of his financial 18 standing and income. 19 20 [70] The RH cannot therefore complain when the Court draws an 21 adverse inference against him due to the failure to make full and frank 22 disclosure of his income and expenditure. In Leow Kooi Wah v Phillip 23 Ng Kok Seng [1997] 2 AMR 2108 the learned Judge held : 24 25 “Whenever the disclosure is by affidavit of facts, by affidavit of 26 documents or by evidence on oath, the obligation of the husband is 27 to be full, frank and clear in that disclosure. Any shortcomings of 28 the husband form the requisite standard can and normally should 29 be visited at least by the court drawing inferences against the 30 husband on matters the subject of the shortcomings.” 31 [71] The inferences that I am compelled to draw would firstly be that the 1 expenditure he claims to have incurred cannot be believed. The second 2 inference would be that the RH’s salary and income is very much higher 3 than SGD20, 000 as he alleged. On this issue I am of the view that the 4 RH can well afford to maintain his wife and children in the manner they 5 were accustomed to before the separation. 6 7 [72] Returning now to the insurance payments, it has been alleged by 8 the RH that the PW has explicitly expressed her desire to make payment 9 of her insurance premiums by herself in striving for her independence and 10 that she has communicated this openly in the presence of the children. I 11 find there is no contemporaneous documentary evidence of the PW 12 having ever intimated this to anyone let alone to the RH. I find this to be a 13 bare allegation and therefore I reject this averment. Consequently, I hold 14 that the RH has to pay the PW’s insurance premiums as listed out in 15 Prayer 5(i) and (ii) of the Notice of Application in Encl 68. 16 17 Conclusion 18 [73] Having carefully scrutinized all the evidence put before this Court, 19 including the written and oral submissions of both parties, I have allowed 20 the PW’s application with some adjustments. 21 22 [74] To summarize the RH is ordered to pay the following sums :

RM3000 per month being child maintenance for the eldest 24 daughter;

(ii) RM1,500 per month being child maintenance for the second 26 daughter;

(iii) RM1,500 per month being spousal maintenance;

(iv) To bear all costs of education for the 2 daughters until 29 completion of their first degree; 30

To pay the insurance premiums belonging to the PW and 1 children;

(vi) To continue paying the instalments for the housing loan as 3 well as the maintenance of the matrimonial home. 4 5 Dated 10 August 2024. 6 7 8 9 (JULIE LACK) 10 Judge 11 High Court of Malaya 12 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Counsel 1 For the Petitioner : 2 Kamaleswari Shanmugam 3 (MESSRS. KAMALES & PARTNER) 4 5 For the Respondent: 6 S. Santhi 7 (MESSRS. S. SAN & CO.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30