Delhi court orders man to resume payment of college fee, expenses to estranged daughter studying in USA

A Delhi court ordered a father to pay his estranged daughter's college fees and living expenses in the USA, citing his coercive actions and financial deceit.

NEW DELHI

The court held that the man cancelled her ticket in a bid to coerce his estranged wife to withdraw a case of domestic violence filed against him. (Shutterstock)

A Delhi court directed a 49-year-old man to pay the college fee and living expenses of his estranged daughter, who was pursuing a degree course in the USA, observing that she could not be left “high and dry” in between her course in a foreign university.

Family court judge Sunil Gupta of Saket courts, passing the order on Monday, held true the allegations levelled against the father of suddenly cancelling his daughter’s flight tickets, in a coercive bid in a domestic violence case filed against him by his wife.

The court noted that the husband had not emphatically denied the allegation that he “blackmailed his two daughters to convince their mother to take her domestic violence case back otherwise he would not fund their education.”

The court was hearing a petition for interim maintenance, filed by the man’s estranged wife and two daughters, through advocate Prabhjit Jauhar. The petition contended that one of the respondent’s daughters secured admission at the University of Southern California in 2024, and all the expenses were being looked after by the father for a year. While the respondent had booked her return tickets to the USA to start her second year in August 2025, he suddenly cancelled the same three days before departure, refusing to pay neither her semester fee nor living expenses.

The plea claimed that the move arose out of a decision of a trial court in July 2025 in an ongoing Domestic Violence (DV) Act case filed by the wife against the husband, which directed him to pay the woman’s house rent.

The petitioner argued that the husband “blackmailed” her daughters to “coerce her into taking the case back”.

In his defence, the man argued that he did not have the requisite financial capacity or monthly income to pay for the remaining foreign education of his daughter.

The order noted that the cancellation of the flight tickets “was an unsuccessful attempt on the part of respondent to show that he was not having requisite funds even to pay for the flight tickets”.

The court said, “In case, the respondent was not having requisite funds for remaining foreign education of his daughter, there was no requirement for him to book her flight tickets”.

The court emphasised that the absence of any record of payment pertaining to those flight tickets suggested that the respondent had not disclosed his financials truthfully.

Directing the father to make the required payment within the next two weeks, the court said, “The present application deserves to be allowed as petitioner no.2 cannot be left high and dry in between her degree course in a foreign university”.