Allowed

Mrs. Geeta Subbiah v. Mr. Mali Subbaiah

Karnataka HC15 Jul 2024WP/3564/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka under Article 227 modified an interim maintenance order in a matrimonial dispute. The writ petition was allowed, the lower court order set aside, and the matter remanded to the Family Court for appropriate disposal within three months after considering income evidence.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to Trial Court to dispose within three months with direction to husband to continue interim payment of Rs. 50,000/- per month.

Mrs. Geeta Subbiah Vs Mr. Mali Subbaiah — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:27297 WP No. 3564 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 3564 OF 2024 (GM-FC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MRS. GEETA SUBBIAH, W/O. MR. MALI SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT.NO.133, ADARSH PALM RETREAT, DEVARABISANAHALLI, NEAR INTEL, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE - 560 103. …PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. GUNASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

MR. MALI SUBBAIAH, S/O. MR. SIDHAMBARAM MAHALINGAM, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.D-403, ADHARSH PALM RETREAT, TOWER-I, D BLOCK, DEVARABISANAHALLI, NEAR INTEL, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE - 560 103.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. AMIT A. MANDGI, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO MODIFY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21/12/2023 PASSED IN MC.NO.5728/2022 ON

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:27297 WP No. 3564 of 2024

¶17

IA.NO.III BY THE COURT OF VITH ADDL. PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, PRODUCED HEREIN AS ANNEXURE-A AND WHICH GRANTS ONLY INTERIM MAINTENANCE OF RS.50,000/- PER MONTH AND ENCHANCE IT TO MONTHLY MAINTEANANCE OF RS. 9,50,000/- (RUPEES NINE LAKHS FIFTY THOUSAND ONLY) AND ETC.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRILIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.3 in M.C.No.5728/2022 dated 21.12.2023 by the VI Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru the wife is before this Court. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.

¶21

The wife had filed the application seeking maintenance of an amount of Rs.9,50,000/- per month. Out of the wedlock the wife and husband were blessed with two children, daughter is pursuing her studies outside the country and the son is 15 years old staying with the mother. According to the wife, the husband is a multimillionaire and she has sought the maintenance. The Court below had granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- per month. The Court below had observed that except stating that the husband is very well of no other

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC:27297 WP No. 3564 of 2024

¶24

document is placed before the Court and accordingly, an amount of Rs.50,000/- is granted.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that the respondent’s father had executed a Will and all those properties are now transferred to the Trust. It is submitted that he is deriving lot of income from the said Trust and he has misrepresented before the Court as if he has no income.

¶26

Learned counsel for the respondent/husband submits that in fact the respondent/husband is living with his friend and the children’s needs are taken care by the Trust and as far as the other income is concerned learned counsel submits that he do not have such income and in fact he has sold his properties and the debts are cleared by the husband. It is submitted that the Villa in which the wife is living is provided by the husband, even the transportation is also provided by the husband.

¶27

Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material placed on record. Both the parties are

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:27297 WP No. 3564 of 2024

¶29

taking different stands and disputed questions of fact and the Court below can appreciate all these aspects. Admittedly, there is no evidence to show what is the income of the husband. The wife is putting forth her case saying that he is having lot of properties. During the course of hearing, it is submitted that if an opportunity is given, they will place the evidence and accordingly, the Court below will fix the maintenance. Considering the same, this Court is inclined to pass the following,

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i. The order passed in I.A.No.3 in M.C.No.5728/2022 dated 21.12.2023 by the VI Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru is set aside.

¶32

ii. The matter is remanded back to the Trial Court and the Trial Court shall dispose of the I.A. within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶33

iii. Till the orders are passed by the Trial Court, the husband shall continue to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- per month to the wife.

¶34

iv. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of .

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:27297 WP No. 3564 of 2024

¶37

v. All I.As. in the writ petition, if any, shall stand

¶38

closed.

¶39

SD/JUDGE

¶40

BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

Mrs. Geeta Subbiah v. Mr. Mali Subbaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Geeta Subbiah v. Mr. Mali Subbaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri J K Munivenkataramanappa Vs Smt Padmavathamma

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar Vs Mrs. Divya K C.

Mrs Valsa Verghese Chacko Vs Smt Muniyamma

Sri Jagadeesh Jayachandra Vs Smt. Sushmitha R

Madhura Prabhu, Vs Chethan Raj

Savitha Sharma Vs Ranjeeta