The High Court dismissed a revision petition challenging a maintenance order. The wife was absent, and though she claimed Rs.15,000 monthly, the Family Court granted Rs.5,000 due to lack of income evidence. The High Court held no infirmity existed.
None. The revision petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:14360 RPFC No. 11 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 11 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
SRI. MOHAMMED ABIDUR RAHAMAN SHARIFF, S/O ALI SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.209, 5TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE, KESARE, MYSURU-570 007.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAVEED S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SMT. KUTEJA S.A., W/O MOHAMMED ABIDUR RAHAMAN SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O LATE ABDUL JABBAR, R/AT NO.2307/3, 4TH CROSS, SAWDEY ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSURU-570 007.
(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
…RESPONDENT
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2019 PASSED IN C.MISC.No.502/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU,
NC: 2024:KHC:14360 RPFC No. 11 of 2021
PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125(1) OF Cr.P.C. FOR MAINTENANCE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Aggrieved by the order passed in
Crl.Misc.No.502/2018 on the file of the II Addl. Principal Family Court at Mysuru, dated 05.08.2019, the husband is before this Court questioning the order of maintenance whereby the wife was granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.
NC: 2024:KHC:14360 RPFC No. 11 of 2021
wedlock, they were blessed with a daughter on 31.01.2014. After the marriage, he left to Dubai in 2015 and thereafter, had not returned back. The husband was never bothered about the welfare of either the wife or the daughter. Later they came to know that the husband was intentionally avoiding the wife and the daughter. Both the wife and daughter are living with the parents of the wife. They have been taking care of her. The child's school fees was disclosed at Rs.25,000/- which has been paid by the elder brother of the wife and on that she got the maintenance of an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month.
NC: 2024:KHC:14360 RPFC No. 11 of 2021
amount every month. The wife is demanding maintenance not only to her, but also to take care of her entire family.
The Court below, considering the case of both the parties, had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month. The Court below had also observed that the wife had not produced any document with regard to the income of the husband. Though it is stated that the husband is owning a shop and a house at Mysore, the evidence on record discloses that the husband is working in Dubai as an electrician. Considering that the Court below had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month.
Court below with regard to the income of the husband. Without there being any evidence, the Court below ought
NC: 2024:KHC:14360 RPFC No. 11 of 2021
not to have granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month. It is further submitted that the order passed by the Court below is without any evidence and it is liable to be set aside.
to say how much he is earning, it is the case that the wife had not produced any document before the Court below to show the income of the husband. As the wife had failed to
place any of the document, the Court below had granted only maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month. The amount granted by the Court below is a very meager amount and it cannot be the contention of the husband
that the husband is not in a position to pay her maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the wife. This
NC: 2024:KHC:14360 RPFC No. 11 of 2021
Court finds no infirmity with the order passed by the Court
below. Accordingly, the revision petition is ' dismissed ' .
SD/JUDGE
BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Family Court's maintenance order granted to an absent respondent who failed to adduce evidence of the husband's income.
Whether the appointment of the wife of a non-resident husband is necessary under Section 125 Cr.P.C. when the respondent does not appear.
Whether the quantum of monthly maintenance awarded by the Family Court is legally unsustainable due to lack of evidence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SRI. MOHAMMED ABIDUR RAHAMAN SHARIFF
SMT. KUTEJA S.A.
LALITHA KANNEGANTI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
