Partly allowed

Smt Vadika Jatla v. Mr Hariprasad Thota

Karnataka HC18 Nov 2023WP/26208/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced interim maintenance for an autistic child to Rs. 15,000 monthly while quashing maintenance for the now-employed mother. It directed that both parents share 50% of the child's educational expenses pending further orders.

What did the court decide?

Maintenance for child enhanced to Rs. 15,000 per month; wife's maintenance quashed; educational expenses shared 50% by each parent subject to further orders.

Smt Vadika Jatla Vs Mr Hariprasad Thota — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:41294 WP No. 26208 of 2022 C/W WP No. 9178 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 26208 OF 2022 (GM-FC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 9178 OF 2023 (GM-FC)

¶8

IN W.P.No.26208/2022:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT VADIKA JATLA W/O SRI HARIPRASAD THOTA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

¶11

HARSHAL THOTA AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS S/O SRI. HARIPRASAD THOTA,

¶12

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

BOTH RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.41, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD CROSS, ADUR, ANNAYAPPA LAYOUT, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BANAGALORE 560016.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SMT. BABY SINDHU P., ADV. FOR SRI. MANJUNATHA PRASANNA H A., ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

MR HARIPRASAD THOTA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, HOUSE NO.41, 3RD CROSS, R/AT ADUR ANNAYAPPA LAYOUT RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BANGALORE 560016.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC:41294 WP No. 26208 of 2022 C/W WP No. 9178 of 2023

¶20

WORKING AT MR. HARIPRASAD THOTA, SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER VADIKA, BLOCK B, GROUND FLOOR, HALLMARK BUILDING, OUTER RING ROAD, KAVERAPPA LAYOUT, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560103.

¶21

…RESPONDENT

¶22

(BY SRI. GANESHA G., ADV.)

¶23

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE/ MODIFY THE INTERIM ORDER DTD.19.10.2022 IN CRI.MISC.NO.224/2021 VIDE ANNX-A PASSED BY THE II ADDL.PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU BY ENCHANCING THE INTERIM MAINTENANCE AMOUNT FROM RS.20,000/- TO RS. 50,000/ - PER MONTH AND MAY BE PLEASED TO AWARD THE EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES OF THE P-2 AS PRAYER IN THE TRIAL COURT.

¶24

IN W.P.No.9178/2023:

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

MR HARI PRASAD THOTA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O SRI. SUDARSHAN RAJU THOTA R/AT NO.41, 3RD CROSS, ADUR ANNAYAPPA LAYOUT RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BANGALORE 560016.

¶27

WORKING AT MR. HARIPRASAD THOTA, SENIOR SOFTWARE ENGINEER J. VADIKA, BLOCK B, GROUND FLOOR, HALLMARK BUILDING, OUTER RING ROAD, KAVERAPPA LAYOUT, KADUBEESANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560103.

¶28

…PETITIONER

¶29

(BY SRI. GANESHA G., ADVOCATE)

¶30

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:41294 WP No. 26208 of 2022 C/W WP No. 9178 of 2023

¶31

AND:

¶32

SMT VADIKA JATLA W/O SRI HARIPRASAD THOTA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

¶33

HARSHAL THOTA AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS S/O SRI. HARIPRASAD THOTA,

¶34

BOTH RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.41, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD CROSS, ADUR, ANNAYAPPA LAYOUT, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BANAGALORE 560016.

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SMT. BABY SINDHU P., ADV. FOR SRI. MANJUNATHA PRASANNA H.A., ADV.)

¶37

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE INTERIM MAINTENANCE ORDER DATED 19.10.2022 IN CRL.MISC.NO.224/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT BENGALURU AGAINST THIS PETITIONER.

¶38

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

The petitioner in W.P.No.26208/2022 is the wife of the respondent. The petitioner in W.P.No.9178/2023 is the husband. These petitions are preferred calling in question a solitary order passed on 19.10.2022, whereby the concerned

¶41

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:41294 WP No. 26208 of 2022 C/W WP No. 9178 of 2023

¶42

Court directs payment of maintenance to the wife at Rs.10,000/- and to the child at Rs.10,000/-.

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo depicting that the wife is not claiming any maintenance for herself, as she has now secured a job and is earning. The memo is taken on record and the maintenance insofar as the wife is concerned is quashed on the memo.

¶44

Insofar as the maintenance to the child at Rs.10,000/- is concerned, since the enhancement is sought to the child as well and the child is suffering from Autism, which would need a special treatment, the maintenance at Rs.10,000/- is on the lower side. Since enhancement is sought

¶45

by the mother giving up her claim for maintenance, I deem it appropriate to enhance the maintenance to the child month on month basis at Rs.15,000/- in place of Rs.10,000/-.

¶46

Learned counsel appearing for the wife also takes this Court to the documents appended to the petition seeking to demonstrate that educational expenses of the child was also a remedy that was sought before the concerned Court and the

¶47

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:41294 WP No. 26208 of 2022 C/W WP No. 9178 of 2023

¶48

concerned Court has blissfully ignored even observing about the said claim.

¶49

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - husband would submit that the wife is also now secured a job and is earning and the educational expenses should be borne by both of them. The submission merits acceptance.

¶50

Therefore, the educational expenses at whatever

¶51

rate it would be, would be borne by both the husband and the wife at 50% each, which would be subject to further orders to be passed by the concerned Court in Crl.Misc.No.224/2021.

¶52

With the aforesaid observations, the petitions stand disposed.

¶53

Sd/JUDGE

¶54

¶55

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Smt Vadika Jatla v. Mr Hariprasad Thota

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Vadika Jatla v. Mr Hariprasad Thota

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

T.S.Shivayya Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. M. Thanigachalam Vs the State of Karnataka

Hanumanthappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohammed Shabaz Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ashok D Sanadi Vs the Chief Secretary

Sri. Shreeram. M. J. Vs the Bank Manager