Husband challenged a Family Court order granting monthly maintenance to his wife and two daughters. The High Court re-appreciated evidence showing he owned luxury cars and landed properties, found no exaggeration in the quantum, and dismissed the revision petition.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 36 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
SHRI. PREETESH PRASAD T.S, S/O SHRI. SHIVA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O BESIDES SRIDEVI HOSTEL, OPP: RAJASHAWARI STEEL FACTORY ROAD, KANAKA NAGARA, SIRA ROAD, TUMAKURU, AND ALSO R/O BABY RICE INDUSTRIES, KIADB INDUSTRIAL AREA, ANTHARASAHALLI, TUMAKURU - 571 112.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. THEJESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S.NO.2 AND 3 ABOVE ARE DAUGHTERS OF SHRI PREETESH PRASAD P.S., BOTH ARE MINORS AND REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN THE 1ST RESPONDENT I.E., RASHMI P
ALL ARE RESIDING AT RAILWAY PARALLEL ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, TUMAKURU CITY - 571 112.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MITHUN GERAHALLI A, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY R1)
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.11.2019 PASSED IN CRL.MIS.NO. 40/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC. 125 OF CR.PC., FOR MAINTENANCE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The revision petition is filed by the petitioner-husband challenging the order of maintenance granted to the respondent-wife and children in C.Mis. No.40/2018 by the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Tumkuru.
NC: 2024:KHC:3265 RPFC No. 36 of 2020
payable to the respondent-wife and children of the petitioner as follows;
"Petitioner are entitled monthly maintenance of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) each from the date of petition till this day, further from this day petitioner no.1 is entitled monthly maintenance of Rs.20,000/(Rupees twenty thousand) and petitioner nos2 and 3 are entitled monthly maintenance of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) each from the respondent till they marry, subject to adjustments, if any payments made during the pendency of this petition."
NC: 2024:KHC:3265 RPFC No. 36 of 2020
NC: 2024:KHC:3265 RPFC No. 36 of 2020
has not committed any error in granting of maintenance amount. Therefore, there is no merit found in this petition.
Sd/JUDGE
SRA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17 CT: BHK
1 issue framed by the court
Was the maintenance quantum awarded to the wife and children by the Family Court excessive given the husband's financial capacity?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Preetesh Prasad T.S
Rashmi P
Kum. Himanidhi
Kum. Thanmayi
Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
