JUDGMENT D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J.— When the heart is filled with emotions and as a result of which eyes get moist and tears start falling, all blood from the heart is utilized before it reaches the brain and the head becomes empty! The present judgment under appeal is a classic example of this biological phenomenon of emotions clouding a decision. 2. Judges by training irrespective of the level at which they function are required to act in a reasonable, logical manner, keeping their heads clear from bias and prejudice and not to give in to passions and emotions, but to apply the relevant law to the fact situation before the court and render a decision/judgment. 3. The basic requirement for any judge is to remain objective at. all times, never to get biased or prejudiced, nor to identify himself or herself with the persons involved in the litigation, but only to look into the fact situation and apply the law without being inhibited by any bias or prejudice and render a decision as it emerges, by giving an answer to the issues before the court on the touchstone of the law applicable to the fact situation. 4. An appellate court examines the order/judgment under appeal and not the judge. A situation may arise when a judgment becomes untenable, unsustainable and gets vitiated, if there is an element of bias or prejudice, which has influenced the decision making process, which, in turn, may cast a doubt as to the legality of the decision or judgment and may even, in a given case, definitely result in vitiating the decision/judgment. The present appeal involves all such possibilities. 5. MFA No. 12622 of 2007 is an appeal filed by the appellant-wife under Section 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [for short, the Act], against the decree of divorce made on a petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(b) of the Act, seeking for dissolution of the marriage between parties solemnized on 15-7-1994. The learned judge of the trial court though found that the husband had not made out grounds as alleged in the petition, particularly the wife pleading itself being that the wife had virtually driven away by the husband during the month of May 1997 because of the inhuman act on the part of husband and members of his family. The learned judge of the trial court though found that the husband had not made out grounds as alleged in the petition, particularly the wife pleading itself being that the wife had virtually driven away by the husband during the month of May 1997 because of the inhuman act on the part of husband and members of his family. The husband had presented the petition for dissolution of the marriage within a couple of months thereafter i.e. on 26-5-1997, accusing the wife of desertion etc. 6. The learned judge of the trial court found that the husband who obviously could not make out a case for divorce, had come up with all sorts of non-existent, untenable allegations, which may, even if made out or proved, could have established grounds for grant of a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(1a) of the Act, constituting an act of cruelty against the wife and even that having not been made out, the learned trial judge, may be having been really weighed down with heaviness in the heart due to unending acrimony between the spouses and being of the view that with so much of differences, the marriage may never work, resorted to the extreme step of dissolving the marriage on the statutorily not available ground of 'irretrievable break-down' of the marriage. It is against such judgment and decree, the present appeal by the wife. 7. While dissolving the marriage, the learned judge of the trial court having found that the parties had two minor children out of the marriage, who were being taken care of by the their mother, appellant herein, who had taken birth before the gestation period and therefore were suffering from several health problems and were in need of constant medical attention and treatment and one of the two children being spastic and also suffering from nervous disorders, thought it proper to order payment of a sum of Rs. 1.00 lakh to each of the child for their maintenance, medical treatment and attention. The learned judge of the trial court in a confused state of mind, has wrongly described the amount as having been awarded by way of permanent alimony in favour of the children, though the wife herself had not claimed any such alimony. 8. 1.00 lakh to each of the child for their maintenance, medical treatment and attention. The learned judge of the trial court in a confused state of mind, has wrongly described the amount as having been awarded by way of permanent alimony in favour of the children, though the wife herself had not claimed any such alimony. 8. While the wife is in appeal [MFA No. 12622 of 2007] against the grant of decree of dissolution of marriage on the ground of 'irretrievable break-down' of the marriage, the husband, for a good measure, has also come up in appeal [MFA No. 0763 of 2007] against that part of the judgment granting maintenance in favour of two minor children at the rate of Rs. 1.00 lakh each. 9. Parties are represented by counsel. At the request of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties the matter has been taken up for final disposal. 10. We have heard Ms Hemalatha Mahishi, learned Counsel for the wife and Sri Bharath, learned Counsel for the husband. 11. Learned Counsel for the parties have taken us through the impugned judgment and have submitted their respective versions. We have also perused the records. 12. However moved the learned judge of the trial court might have been, by looking at the plight of the parties and however practical he might have been in so thinking in the context of a matrimonial dispute, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the petition presented before the family court was one under the provisions of Section 13(1)(i-b) of the Act. 13. A Hindu marriage is a sacrament and is therefore under the customary law. There was no scope for dissolving a marriage solemnized between the parties under the customary Hindu Law. A marriage is for life under the Hindu Law. 13. A Hindu marriage is a sacrament and is therefore under the customary law. There was no scope for dissolving a marriage solemnized between the parties under the customary Hindu Law. A marriage is for life under the Hindu Law. It is the statutory law which has made a deviation from the customary law and has provided for an avenue to warring couples who cannot reconcile with one another, who cannot have an attitude of 'give and take', who cannot see eye to eye with each other, who find more bitterness in the marriage than any solace or succour and the pressures of the present day living having taken its toll on the family life, with joint families having broken into nuclear families, comprising of only husband and wife, while had paved the way for the law makers to usher in a legislation to supplement the customary law, it can work/operate only to the extent provided for in the statute and not beyond. 14. It is not the domain of the courts to supplement the provisions of law, however laudable it may be, to provide for a situation of dissolving the marriage, in the event of a proven fact situation of 'irretrievable break-down' of the marriage being noticed. 15. It nevertheless does not enable the courts, which functions in accordance with law and have to decide cases on the touchstone of the statutory provisions as are applicable to the fact situation, to tinker with the law to the extent of supplementing new grounds to the statutorily enumerated grounds. 16. While Parliament may get active for such purpose and it appears that there are some steps in this regard, this Court cannot act as a soothsayer or fortune teller of events to come in advance applying a possible future law! We cannot sustain the judgment and the decree for dissolution of the marriage between the parties on the ground of marriage having 'irretrievably broken-down' however much the learned judge of the trial court might have thought that it. was ultimately inevitable in his opinion. Therefore, MFA No. 12622 of 2007 filed by the wife has to be allowed. but, the next step is for what purpose and in what direction the parties should head hereinafter? 17. Learned Counsel appearing for the wife has brought to our notice that the children are suffering from many ailments and require constant medical attention. Therefore, MFA No. 12622 of 2007 filed by the wife has to be allowed. but, the next step is for what purpose and in what direction the parties should head hereinafter? 17. Learned Counsel appearing for the wife has brought to our notice that the children are suffering from many ailments and require constant medical attention. To buttress the same, learned Counsel has filed an application in Misc. Civil 8306 of 2010] in the other appeal [MFA No. 9763 of 2007], which is an appeal filed by the husband questioning the legality of the very judgment in so far as it relates to awarding maintenance to the children at the rate of Rs. 1.00 lakh each. 18. The application is ordered, as the application apprises the court of the present condition of the minor children, whose care, maintenance, upbringing, education etc., though are all taken care of by their natural guardian [appellant in MFA No. 12622 of 2007], the court remains the ultimate guardian of all minor children and we have to bear this in mind while examining any application filed on behalf of minor children. 19. Any evidence sought to be brought on record to apprise the court about the circumstance and conditions of minor children is always to be received and appreciated and not to be kept out. Therefore, we allow the application, ordering acceptance of the accompanying document in the nature of a certificate issued by the Christian Medical College, Vellore by Dr. Henry Prakash, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 20. This document discloses that the son of the parties is suffering from central motor dysfunction with spastic diplegia, which only means that the child will be having difficulty in movement of his limbs, it will be very lethargic and the child may also go into bouts of spasms periodically. 21. The pathetic circumstance definitely cries out to compel the father of the children to shoulder a part of the responsibility for their maintenance, up-keep and education of the children, notwithstanding the fact that the mother is also earning, as a teacher in a Schedule Caste Welfare School, at Vellore in Tamilnadu, which factum is brought out by the father of the children himself. 22. We notice that the father of the children is working as a senior turner in Bharath Earth Movers Ltd., at KGF and draws a gross salary of Rs. 22. We notice that the father of the children is working as a senior turner in Bharath Earth Movers Ltd., at KGF and draws a gross salary of Rs. 21,114.18 as on December, 2008 and after deductions of Rs. 20,982.18, the take home salary of the father of the children was a pittance of Rs. 155/-! 23. Sri Bharath, learned Counsel appearing for the father of the children has drawn our attention to the memo dated 25-2-2010. a copy of which is conveniently not furnished to the other side, to which is appended the salary slip of the father produced in the context of Execution Case No. 176 of 2008, pending before the court of Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), KGF, which is levied at the instance of the mother of the children for recovery of arrears of maintenance to the extent of Rs. 2,01,068/- and the attached salary slip of her husband for the satisfaction of the decree in her favour. The accompanying salary slip indicates the following deductions: PF regular 2044,00 PF extra 8856.00 Prof Tax 200.00 Annual Adv. Repayment 800.00 Book Loan Repayment 200.00 PF Loan Repayment 1494.00 Two Wheeler Repayment 180.00 Adhoc Adv. Recovery 376.40 Canteen Recovery 172.50 CMA- 1 13.00 KLWF 3.00 Petrol 267.20 BEMEAKGF 1.00 BEML Emp. Cr. Sec., KGF 115.00 BEML SC/ST Ass. KGF 10.00 BEML WUF KGF 10.00 Death Relief Fund 40.00 GSLI 100.00 LIC Premium 218.00 LWF Miscellaneous 140.00 PRL JMFC COURT 5600.00 Sub Post Master gen. KGF 150.00 Rounding off adjustment 1.58 Total 20982.68 We notice that a major portion of the deductions is self-created by the father of the children, may be only to deny the wife and children of any payment towards their maintenance or educational expenses. 24. On the other hand, we find that the actual total salary of the father of the minor children is Rs. 21,114.18, which is the present earning of the father. We also notice that a big chunk of the salary viz., Rs. 8,856/- is towards extra provident fund contribution being remitted by the employee over and above the regular contribution of Rs. 2,044/-. This exposes the husband's deliberate attempt not only to make an effort to deny payment of maintenance but also to avoid the salary being attached in execution proceedings for satisfaction of court decrees. 25. Therefore, we cannot go by the salary certificate indicating a pittance of Rs. 2,044/-. This exposes the husband's deliberate attempt not only to make an effort to deny payment of maintenance but also to avoid the salary being attached in execution proceedings for satisfaction of court decrees. 25. Therefore, we cannot go by the salary certificate indicating a pittance of Rs. 155/- as monthly take home salary by a person whose gross salary is beyond Rs. 21,000/-. There appears to be some collusion between the employee and the employer, as normally deductions cannot exceed 50% of the gross salary, even in terms of the statutory provisions governing the employee-employer relationship, more so in a public sector undertaking like BEML. 26. We take a judicial notice of this position in law and therefore though the appeal of the wife against the decree of dissolution of the marriage is allowed and the decree for dissolution of the marriage is set aside, having regard to the overall circumstances and pathetic condition of the children, particularly having bestowed our attention to several health disorders with which one of the children is suffering, we sustain the award of Rs. 1.00 lakh in favour of each of the child not. by way of permanent alimony, but towards maintenance in terms of Section 26 of the Act, with a condition that, the amount should be kept in a term deposit in a nationalized bank in the name of the two children with liberty to their mother [appellant in MFA No. 12622 of 2007] to draw the interest thereon and utilize the same for the benefit of the children during the life time of the male child and up to the marriage of the female child and whereafter it is open to the parties to seek for modification of the order in so far as it relates to the amount in deposit and for further use of the amount. We pass this order having taken note of the observations made by the learned judge of the trial court that the order towards maintenance to the minor children is being passed after taking into note the maintenance award being ordered to be paid by the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Vellur in a Section 125 Cr.PC proceedings and even while the father is under compulsion to pay the amount ordered by that court. The order passed in these two appeals will not in the way affect or alter the payment in terms of the order made by the learned CJM at Vellore. 27. In the result, MFA No. 9763 of 2007, filed by the husband, is dismissed and MFA No. 12622 of 2007, filed by the wife, is allowed and the decree of dissolution of marriage between the parties on the ground of 'irretrievable break-down' of the marriage is set aside and the order, in so far as payment of alimony is concerned, is modified as indicated above. Ordered accordingly. Having regard to the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are directed to bear their own costs. 28. A litigation expenditure of Rs. 10,000/- is ordered in terms of the order dated 3-6-2010 in MFA No. 9763 of 2007 in favour of the appellant-wife in MFA No. 12622 of 2007. If the amount has already been deposited, the appellant-wife is permitted to draw the same and if not deposited, the amount can be recovered as part of arrears of maintenance in favour of the minor children along with other arrears in their favour before the executing court.