1. It is not clear whether your sister works for gain anywhere or not. If not then she is entitled to her maintenance and not liable for maintenance of the child as well.

2. It is really weird that court has given direction to your sister to pay maintenance.

3. Your sister can file a suit for custody as the child is still infant and she being his mother has a good case.

the father and the mother both are employed and hence they cannot demand maintenance from each other. The child custody can be claimed by both and it is for the court to decide whether the child should be with the mother or father. Various factors are responsible for giving custody.....income residence schooling of the child personal attachment to the child etc.

Maintenance for the child has to be borne by both the parties as both if then are earning although the husband should give more as he is working on a higher post.

Regards 

Welfare of child is paramount consideration 

2) court would mother custody of child 

3) if both are working expenses have to be shared  in proportion to your income 

1)Under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the custody of all children below the age of 5 years is given to the mother.

2) Parents with same pay must share child’s maintenance equally.

The mother can file custody of the child on ground age of child ,further she is also paying expense of the child and further it is necessary for the welfare of child. Also there are judgement wherein court has held that mother and father  shall equally share responsibility of the child.

1. As per the information mentioned in the present query, makes it clear that the custody of the child is with the father, and now you may wish to go for the custody of the child also.
2. As according to me, court has rightly decided to direct not the latents for joint sharing of the expenses of the child, as your sister is also been working and there is no discremination in law to provide maintenance by mother do she is also working and eating little good.
3. And now for the custody issue, you will have to look for a reason as to why you want the custody of the child and why not you objected as the time of allowing it to the father (as not mentioned in the query, whether you did object or not). And I believe, you must be having the visiting right to the child.

Already answered my last question.  One of the couple with custody of child and visitation rights to one parent

1. To maintain the child is a liability that has to be shared jointly by both parents. The order of the court directing sharing of expenses does not seem to suffer any legal infirmity.

2. Nothing stops your sister though from filing a petition under the Guardians and Wards Act to seek the custody of her child. Since the child is only 2 years old the custody may in all likelihood be awarded to mother unless father is able to prove that conduct of mother is unbecoming of mother.

Dear Sir,

The mother is having absolute right over minor child custody.  And father is having absolute right to maintenance his wife and child.  Regarding custody of child please the following information may help you.

Custody rights of Indian moms (and dads) after divorce

Recently, the Supreme Court had stayed an order of the Gujarat High Court asking a mother to take her eight-year-old son to the United Kingdom, because of a judicial order passed there in a custody battle initiated by her estranged husband. Divorce and custody battles can become a quagmire and the innocent child gets caught up in the legal and psychological warfare between both parents.

Under Indian law, maximum importance is given to the best interests of the child and so either parent does not have a clear primacy to be granted the custody of the child.

After the dissolution of a marriage, custody of a child can be given as:         Joint Physical Custody: A new concept that has evolved while negotiating divorce settlements. Both parents will have legal custody, but one will have the physical custody (child resides with him or her) and will be the child’s primary caretaker.

Sole Custody: One parent has been proven to be an abusive and unfit parent and the other parent is granted custody.

Third Party Custody: Neither of the biological parents are given custody of the child. Instead, the child custody is granted to a third person by the court.

The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 is the universal law pertaining to issues involving child custody and guardianship in India, regardless of the child’s religion. However, under secular principles, India also sanctions laws pertaining to different religions.

Under secular law as well as Hindu law

• The mother usually gets custody of the minor child, under the age of five.
• Fathers get custody of older boys and mothers of older girls, but it is not a strict rule and is primarily decided based on the child’s interests.
• The choice of a child above the age of nine is considered.
• A mother who is proven to neglect or ill-treat the child is not given custody.

• Landmark Judgement pronounced by SC dealing with guardianship & custodial and visitation rights to parents and children stuck in matrimonial disputes
  
  
  
• In a remarkable judgment dealing with interim custody of child suffering in parent’s matrimonial disputes, visitation rights and guardianship, a 2 judge bench of Supreme Court laid down various propositions of law while awarding the interim custody till final disposal by the trial court to the mother. The bench speaking through Justice Vikramjit Sen, lays down very sharp observations and examines various definitions of a ‘guardian’, ‘visitation rights’ and tests the issue from the angle of provisions of Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956 and Guardian & Wards Act, 1890.In a custody battle between estranged parents, a minor child, who has not completed five years of age, shall be allowed to remain with the mother, the Supreme Court has ruled saying that in such cases child should not treated as a "chattel". The court said that under Hindu Minority and Guardianship (HMG) Act, a father can be guardian of the property of the minor child but not the guardian of his person if the child is less than five years old.
• The Court said that there can be no cavil that when a Court is confronted by conflicting claims of custody there are no rights of the parents which have to be enforced; the child is not a chattel or a ball that is bounced to and fro the parents. It is only the child's welfare which is the focal point for consideration. Parliament rightly thinks that the custody of a child less than five years of age should ordinarily be with the mother and this expectation can be deviated from only for strong reasons.
• http://www.hrln.org/hrln/child-rights/pils-a-cases/1685-landmark-judgment-pronounced-by-sc-dealing-with-guardianship-a-custodial-and-visitation-rights-to-parents-and-children-stuck-in-matrimonial-disputes.html
•  

dear Client,

It is compulsion on both parents to contribute in child growth. Father is natural guardian but child up to 5 years of age, custody rest with mother only. Ad on the basis of father`s higher position and income, this order can be challenged that ratio of contribution shall be 40 - 60 or 35 - 65 etc.

Can claim custody of child by filing application in court.

The court has already passed an order to this effect.

Hence she may have to obey the court order.

For child custody she may have to file a separate case.