Dismissed

Sri. M. Rajanna v. Smt. Dhanalakshmi

Karnataka HC1 Jul 2021RPFC/114/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition sought to set aside an Family Court order enhancing the wife's maintenance from Rs.6,000/- to Rs.15,000/. The court noted the delay but considered that Rs.15,000/- is not excessive given inflation and living costs. Dismissing the challenge, the court held the impugned order possessed no merit for interference.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act to set aside the impugned order enhancing maintenance was rejected.

Sri. M. Rajanna Vs Smt. Dhanalakshmi — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

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

¶5

RPFC NO.114/2017

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

SRI M. RAJANNA S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.34/B, 5^TH CROSS, SHANTHI NAGARA BANGALORE-560027

¶8

… PETITIONER

¶9

(By Sri G. NARAYANA RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND

¶11

SMT. DHANALAKSHMI W/O M. RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.130/C AKKITHIMMANAHALLI ‘E’ STREET, BANGALORE-560027

¶12

… RESPONDENT

¶13

(SERVED)

¶14

THIS R.P.F.C. IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.05.2017 PASSED IN CRL.MISC. NO.107/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE

¶15

¶16

PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.127 OF CR.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE.

¶17

THIS R.P.F.C. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT AT BENGALURU MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Though the matter is listed today for Admission, with the consent of learned counsel for both the

¶20

parties, it is taken for disposal.

¶21

The petition is filed by the revision-petitionerhusband under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, praying to set aside the order dated 04.05.2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru in Crl.Misc. No.107/2013 filed by the revision-respondent-wife seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount from Rs.6,000/- to Rs.50,000/by modifying the order dated 22.05.2008 passed in Cr.Misc. No.108/2006.

¶22

¶23

3. The revision petitioner is the husband. He has

¶24

challenged the enhancement of the maintenance.

¶25

The substance of the case are as under:

¶26

A petition was filed earlier by the revision-

¶27

respondent seeking maintenance claiming that her husband who is the revision/petitioner herein has sufficient means of income as he is getting more than Rs.1,00,000/- per month from house rent. After considering the entire case, the Court below, ordered payment of maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month vide order dated 22.05.2008, which includes litigation expenses of Rs.1,000/-. In the later circumstances,

¶28

the wife revision-respondent filed a petition for enhancement of maintenance in Crl.Misc. 107/2013 wherein the Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru held the income of the revision/petitioner even in the absence of documents comes up to Rs.60,000/- per month and

¶29

¶30

¼ of the said amount could be ordered as

¶31

maintenance to the petitioner. Accordingly the earlier grant of Rs.6,000/- was enhanced to Rs.15,000/- per month. The following were the documents provided by the revision-respondent before the Family Court, based on which Judge to came to the above conclusion:

¶32

Ex.P1 : Notarized copy of C.Misc.108/2006

¶33

Ex.P2 : Katha extract Ex.P3 : Encumbrance certificate

¶34

Ex.P4 : Building Photographs

¶35

Ex.P5 : Negative

¶36

Exs.P6 to P8 : Photographs

¶37

Ex.P9 : Certified copy of order in O.S. No.8915/2011

¶38

Ex.P10 : Certified copy of Sale Deed

¶39

Exs.P11 & 12 : Photographs.

¶40

¶41

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the revision-petitioner does not get the income as claimed by the revision/respondent and the Family Court erred in assuming his income at Rs.60,000/- per month.

¶42

The marital relationship between the parties is not disputed. Grant of Rs.6,000/- per month in the earlier order on 22.05.2008 came to enhanced by order of learned Family Judge on 04.05.2017 in Crl. Misc. No.107/2013. The petition for maintenance was filed in the year 2006, which came to be disposed of on 22.05.2008.

¶43

It is unfortunate that even in the matter of maintenance disposal takes up considerable time, where under the reasonable portion of the life of the claimant gets washed out, without sufficient means of life, which is not tolerable.

¶44

¶45

In the instant case, earlier the maintenance was

¶46

granted on 22.05.2008 in the petition filed in the year 2006. Now we are in the year 2021. The petition for enhancement was filed in the year 2013, which was disposed of by the impugned order dated 04.05.2017. In the matter of maintenance, the reckoning factors are capacity to earn by the husband, negligent to maintain wife and unjustifiable social and economic background of the parties. Though the revision/petitioner has claimed that the amount of maintenance granted is excessive and he has claimed that he has no sufficient means, considering the present day of sky rocketing of prices for necessities and cost of living including medical expenses, today an amount of Rs.15,000/- may not be considered as excessive or exorbitant. More particularly, in the light of admission of relationship. Therefore, I find the

¶47

¶48

present revision petition lacks merits to qualify for admission to face further proceedings. There is no circumstance which calls for interference in the order dated 04.05.2017. Accordingly, petition is rejected.

¶49

Sd/JUDGE

¶50

Sbs*

Sri. M. Rajanna v. Smt. Dhanalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. M. Rajanna v. Smt. Dhanalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. K S Navya Vs Mr. Anthrasa @ Adreyas

Mr. Venkateshappa Vs Mrs. Bhagyamma

Smt. Lakshmamma Vs K P Manjunatha

Sri K H Nagaraju Vs Smt Usha M S

S Noorya Naik Vs Smt Sharadabai

Sri Sampangiramaiah @ Sampangeppa Vs Smt Venkatamma