Allowed

Mrs Rajeswari Somasundaram v. v R Kumar

Karnataka HC14 Oct 2024WP/16337/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed two conflicting writ petitions challenging an interim maintenance order. It set aside the Family Court order, which ignored affidavits on assets, and directed reconsideration after considering all documents. Petitioner seeks enhancement; respondent seeks reduction.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; Family Court directed to reconsider application afresh considering all documents.

Mrs Rajeswari Somasundaram Vs v R Kumar — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 16337 OF 2021 (GM-FC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 21470 OF 2022 (GM-FC)

¶7

IN WP No. 16337/2021

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MRS. RAJESWARI SOMASUNDARAM W/O MR V.R. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT 777, AKSHAYA, 1^ST FLOOR, 3^RD CROSS, VINAYAKANAGAR A BLOCK, MURUGESHPALYA, VIMANAPURA, BANGALORE-560017.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by R DEEPA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI.B.K.SAMPATH KUMAR & SURAJ SAMPATH, ADVS.)

¶13

AND:

¶14

V R KUMAR S/O MR.V.R.VEERAPPAN, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, INCORRECTLY SHOWN IN THE M.C. PETITION AS RESIDING AT NO.777, AKSHAYA, 1^ST FLOOR, 3^RD CROSS, VINAYAKANAGAR A BLOCK, MURUGESHPALYA, VIMANAPURA, BANGALORE-560017.

¶15

ACTUALLY RESIDING AT NO.4, RATNA VIHAR, GROUND FLOOR, DODDANEKUNDI EXTENSION, CHINNAPANAHALLI,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶18

BANGALORE-560037.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SMT. POORNIMA H.S., ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING FOR A DIRECTION BY MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 19.03.2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE II ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE IN M.C.NO.6930/2018 VIDE ANNX-A AND ENHANCE THE MAINTENANCE PENDENTE LITE INCLUDING THE LITIGATION EXPENSES TO BE PAID BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER TO RS. 1,00,000/(RUPEES ONE LAKH ONLY) PER MONTH PENDING DISPOSAL OF M.C.NO.6930/2018 AND ETC.

¶22

IN WP NO. 21470/2022

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

MR V R KUMAR S/O MR V R VEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.777 AKSHYA, 1^ST FLOOR, 3^RD CROSS, VINAYAKANAGAR A BLOCK KONENA AGRAHARA, VIMANAPURA BANGALORE -560017

¶25

...PETITIONER

¶26

(BY SMT. POORNIMA H S., ADVOCATE)

¶27

AND:

¶28

MRS RAJESHWARI SOMASUNDARAM W/O V R KUMAR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.777 AKSHYA, 1^ST FLOOR,

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶30

3^RD CROSS, VINAYAKANAGAR A BLOCK MURGESHPALYA VIMANAPURA BANGALORE -560017

¶31

...RESPONDENT

¶32

(BY SRI. SURAJ S., ADVOCATE)

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING FOR A DIRECTION BY MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 19.03.2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE IN M.C.NO.6930/2018 VIDE ANNX-A AND FIX THE MAINTENANCE PENDENTE LITE TO Rs.8,000/PER MONTH PENDING DISPOSAL OF M.C.NO.6930/2018.

¶34

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶35

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶36

ORAL ORDER

¶37

These writ petitions are filed challenging the order on I.A.No.III dated 19.03.2021, passed in M.C.No.6930/2018

¶38

by the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. The wife filed a writ petition in W.P. No.16337/2021 seeking for enhancement of interim maintenance amount, and the husband challenged the

¶39

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶40

same order in W.P. No.21470/2022 for reduction of interim maintenance.

¶41

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these writ petitions are as follows:

¶42

The parties are referred to as per their ranking in W.P.No.16337/2021. The petitioner and respondents are husband and wife. The husband filed a petition for dissolution of their marriage in M.C.No.6930/2018, and their marriage was solemnized on 21.08.2015. After the marriage, the petitioner-wife was residing in Thanjavur and shifted to a matrimonial house. The petitioner is the youngest of 3 sisters. Her father and mother passed away. Petitioner’s sisters are unmarried and living with their respective husbands. Nobody is there to look after the petitioner financially and emotionally apart from the respondent. The respondent is highly educated and working in a company. He is an employee in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (for short HAL) working as a Senior Manager and earning more than Rs.2 lakhs p.m. The

¶43

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶44

respondent owns several immovable properties in his native place and in Hosur. He receives rental income from

¶45

those properties. After shifting to Bengaluru, she was unable to secure any employment. The petitioner has no source of income for maintaining herself. The respondent promised to maintain the petitioner and look after her requirements. The petitioner is facing financial difficulties, and she filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking interim maintenance and litigation expenses. The said application was opposed by the respondent-husband by filing objections. It is contended that the petitioner-wife is well educated and holds a Bachelor's Degree in Engineering with distinction. she is employed and earning a decent salary, and she is capable of maintaining herself. The family court, after hearing both the parties, allowed the application I.A.No.III filed by petitioner-wife in part and directed the respondent to pay interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- p.m to the wife from the date of I.A.No.III till the disposal of the main petition. Further, the husband was directed to pay

¶46

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶47

Rs.10,000/- to the wife as one-time litigation expenses. The petitioner-wife and respondent-husband, both aggrieved by the order on I.A.No.III filed these writ petitions.

¶48

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶49

also learned counsel for the respondent.

¶50

Learned counsel for the wife submits that the

¶51

interim maintenance awarded by the Family Court is on the lower side, and she submits that the husband is liable to pay the maintenance in a similar manner as she would have lived in the house of her husband. It is contended that the husband is under a legal obligation to maintain the wife so that she can live with dignity. She cannot compel to become a destitute or a beggar. Learned counsel appearing for the wife submits that the petitioner, as well as the respondent-husband, filed an affidavit for the assets and liabilities. The Family Court, without looking into the affidavit filed by the parties, granted an interim maintenance, which is on the lower side. Hence,

¶52

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶53

he submits that the writ petition filed by the wife may be allowed and the writ petition filed by the husband may be dismissed.

¶54

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-

¶55

husband submits that the petitioner holds a Master's Degree and she is capable of maintaining herself, and she filed an application under Section 24 of The Hindu Marriage Act, only with an intention to extract money from the husband. She further submits that the husband filed an affidavit for assets and liabilities. The Family Court failed to consider the affidavit for the assets and liabilities filed by the parties. She submits that parties have urged several grounds before the Family Court. The Family Court, without considering the grounds urged by the parties, proceeded to pass the impugned order. Hence, she submits that the matter requires reconsideration by the Family Court and prays to set aside the impugned order and direct the Family Court to reconsider the application.

¶56

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶57

Perused the records and considered the

¶58

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶59

It is not in dispute that the petitioner and respondent are the husband and wife, and the dispute arises between the petitioner and respondent. The husband filed a petition for divorce against the wife in M.C.No.6930/2018 on the file of the Principal Family Judge, Bengaluru. In the said proceedings, the petitionerwife filed an application in I.A.No.III under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking direction to the husband to pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh p.m. to the wife towards interim maintenance and litigation expenses. Though in support of an application, the wife filed an affidavit contending that she is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and she is the youngest of 3 sisters, and her father passed away on 30.08.2018 and nobody is there to look after her except her husband - respondent and the respondent is working. It is contended that petitioner’s husband has completed her B.E in Mechanical Engineering and also completed

¶60

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶61

Masters in Quality Management sponsored by TATA projects and presently he is working under the

¶62

professionals scheme.

¶63

The husband is working in HAL and drawing a salary of Rs.1,66,739/- during January 2018, he owns several immovable properties in his native place and in Hosur, and he receives rental income from those properties. It is contended that despite her efforts she was unable to secure any employment. It is contended that the petitioner-wife had no sufficient source of income to maintain herself, and she had no sufficient money to pay litigation expenses. The said application was opposed by the husband by filing objections. The Family Court considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, allowed the application. The petitioner as well as respondent produced numerous documents. The Family Court, has not considered the affidavit for the assets and liabilities filed by the parties; without considering the same, the Family Court has passed the impugned order.

¶64

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:41450 WP No. 16337 of 2021 C/W WP No. 21470 of 2022

¶65

From the perusal of the impugned order passed

¶66

by the Family Court, the Family Court, without considering the material placed on record by the parties has passed the impugned order. The matter requires reconsideration by the Family Court.

¶67

Accordingly, I proceeded to pass the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

The writ petitions are allowed.

¶70

The impugned order is set aside.

¶71

The Family Court is directed to reconsider the application afresh and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, after considering all the documents produced by the parties.

¶72

All the contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶73

Sd/(ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE

¶74

sks

Mrs Rajeswari Somasundaram v. v R Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Rajeswari Somasundaram v. v R Kumar

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

M/S Shri Santhosh Meenakshi Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner

Sri Rajegowda G D Vs Panchayath Development Officer

Sri. Vinuth S P Vs Sri. Siddeshwara Prasad H R

Sri Yashwanth D Vs Smt Divyashree C

Mahboob Khan Vs Smt Hayath Bi

Venkatesha Vs Hemalatha S