PEMPETISYEN MARIAMMA A/P SUPPAN 1. ) SURESH KUMAR A/L VELU 2. ) KAALA DEVI A/P GOPALAKRISHNAN

PEMPETISYEN MARIAMMA A/P SUPPAN 1. ) SURESH KUMAR A/L VELU 2. ) KAALA DEVI A/P GOPALAKRISHNAN

Completion of the eldest child’s tertiary education on 26.9.2024 constitutes a material change in circumstances under Sections 95 and 96 LRA, terminating the father’s maintenance obligation for that child and justifying a one‑third reduction of the RM3,500 order to RM2,333 and repayment of excess sums; procedural defects in the notice did not occasion prejudice and were dismissed under the Rules of Court.

Citation
NA-33-101-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner Wife: Mariamma a/p Suppan; Respondent Husband: Suresh Kumar a/l Velu; Joint Respondent: Kala Devi a/p Gopalakrishnan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 January 2026
Case Number
NA-33-101-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition (variation of Maintenance) / High Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; variation of maintenance order affirmed in favour of Respondent Husband
Legal Topics
Child Maintenance, Variation of Maintenance Orders, Law Reform (marriage and Divorce) Act 1976, Garnishee Orders, Procedural Compliance (form 11, Rule 56)
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Matrimonial Law Civil Procedure Child Maintenance Variation of Maintenance Orders Law Reform (marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 Garnishee Orders Procedural Compliance (form 11, Rule 56)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mariamma a/p Suppan

Petitioner Wife

Suresh Kumar a/l Velu

Respondent Husband

Kala Devi a/p Gopalakrishnan

Joint Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition (variation of Maintenance) / High Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether completion of tertiary education by the eldest child terminates the father's maintenance obligation
  2. 2 Whether enclosure 99 was defective for non‑compliance with Form 11 and Rule 56 and whether that defect defeats the substantive application
  3. 3 Whether there was a material change in circumstances justifying variation and refund of overpaid maintenance

Ratio Decidendi

Completion of the eldest child’s tertiary education on 26.9.2024 constitutes a material change in circumstances under Sections 95 and 96 LRA, terminating the father’s maintenance obligation for that child and justifying a one‑third reduction of the RM3,500 order to RM2,333 and repayment of excess sums; procedural defects in the notice did not occasion prejudice and were dismissed under the Rules of Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; variation of maintenance order affirmed in favour of Respondent Husband

Orders

  • The monthly maintenance payable by the Respondent Husband is reduced from RM3500.00 to RM2333.00 for the two remaining children
  • The Petitioner Wife is ordered to return the monies overpaid since the eldest child completed her tertiary education on 26.9.2024