Dismissed

Sri.Dadakalandar S/O Husainsab Khanagavi v. Smt.Aneesa W/O Dadakhalandar Khanagavi

Karnataka HC19 Nov 2018WP/106043/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., the husband challenged an order granting him Rs.5,000 monthly interim maintenance. The Court held that the duty towards a mother cannot absolve the duty to maintain one's wife and rejected the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition filed by the husband seeking to quash the interim maintenance order and reduce the amount was rejected.

Sri.Dadakalandar S/O Husainsab Khanagavi Vs… — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

: 1 :

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO

¶7

W.P. No. 106043/2018 (GM-FC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. DADAKALANDAR S/O HUSAINSAB KHANAGAVI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC.: DRIVER, R/O BALESHNAVAR LANE, SAUNDATTI-591 126, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DT: BELAGAVI.

¶10

PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SMT. ANEESA W/O DADAKHALANDAR KHANAGAVI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC.: TAILORING AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, NOW RESIDINT AT C/O MOHAMMAD IKBAL KARNOOL, NEHRU NAGAR, GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DT: DHARWAD.

¶14

RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI VIJAY S. CHINIVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-A ON I.A. NO. I IN M.C. NO. 110/2018 DATED 10.09.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI & ETC.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING UP FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

: 2 :

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petition is directed against the impugned order passed by the learned Prl. Judge, Family Court, Hubballi, on I.A. No. I dated 10.09.2018 in M.C. No. 110/2018 wherein an amount of Rs.5,000/- is awarded to the petitioner-wife from the date of petition till disposal of the case.

¶21

In order to avoid confusion, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

¶22

Petitioner herein is the husband and the respondent herein is the wife. It is stated that the respondent herein preferred an application u/S 125 of Cr.P.C. before the trial Court for grant of maintenance which is said to be pending. The application for interim maintenance came to be disposed of on 10.09.2018 wherein the husband was directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the petitioner from the date of petition till disposal of the case. In this connection, the husband has come up with this writ petition.

¶23

The brief point for consideration would be, whether the order passed by the trial Court requires reconsideration in the present form or any other form of proceedings. It is

¶24

: 3 :

¶25

stated that the petitioner herein is the Driver of a vehicle coming under the City Municipal Corporation of Saundatti.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner Smt. Shaila Bellikatti would submit that the petitioner has heavy responsibility to maintain his mother who is said to have been diagnosed malignancy.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-wife Sri Vijay S. Chinivar, would support the impugned order.

¶28

In the circumstances of the case, considering the cost of living and the daily requirements it cannot be forgotten that the respondent herein, his wife, is also a family member, who requires to be maintained. The duty towards mother by itself cannot absolve the duties of a son from maintaining his wife.

¶29

In the circumstances, I do not find any reasonability to interfere with the order and reducing it. Petition fails and is hereby rejected.

¶30

SD JUDGE

¶31

bvv

Sri.Dadakalandar S/O Husainsab Khanagavi v. Smt.Aneesa W/O Dadakhalandar Khanagavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Dadakalandar S/O Husainsab Khanagavi v. Smt.Aneesa W/O Dadakhalandar Khanagavi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Leelavathi Vs Smt. Adilakshmi

Javeerdahammad B. Sunkad Vs Govind S/O Yankappa Vaddar

Shauksth Ali Nabisab Nadaf Vs the State of Karnataka

Yallappa Vs Nirmala @ Chinnamma

Sunilkumar.B. S/O Bhogashetty Vs Nihal D/O Sunilkumar Bhogashetty

Mahesh Sharanappa Umanabadi Vs the State of Karnataka