Partly allowed

Sri. I. G. Madhusudhan Rao v. Smt. Ranjana. M

Karnataka HC19 Mar 2024WP/3602/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross-writ petitions by husband and wife against an interim maintenance order of Rs.10,000 per month in a restitution of conjugal rights case. The husband, who never filed his statement of assets and liabilities despite appearing through counsel, failed to show any grounds; his petition was dismissed. The wife's enhancement petition succeeded only to the extent that maintenance was made payable fr

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri. I. G. Madhusudhan Rao Vs Smt. Ranjana. M — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 3602 OF 2024 (GM-FC)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 14305 OF 2023 (GM-FC)

¶9

IN W.P. NO. 3602 / 2024

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI. I. G. MADHUSUDHAN RAO S/O. LATE GOWRI SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO. 5, 2ND FLOOR, A BLOCK, BBMP QUARTERS MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGIRAM NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SMT.PRAMILA NESARGI.,SENIOR COUNSEL A/W; SMT. BINDU U.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

SMT. RANJANA. M W/O. MADHUSUDHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO. 5, 2ND FLOOR, 22ND MAIN, J.C. NAGAR-1, KAVERI NAGAR, KURUBARAHALLI, MAHALAXMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 086.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI. GEETHA DEVI M P.,ADVOCATE)

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH OR TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 10.02.2023 ON IA NO.2 IN MC NO. 502/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE IIND ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE AT BANGALORE AND CONSEQUENTLY STAY THE PROCEEDINGS IN EX NO. 113/2023 PENDING BEFORE IIND ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE, BANGALORE PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE W.P.

¶21

IN W.P. NO. 14305 / 2023

¶22

BETWEEN:

¶23

SMT RAJANA WIFE OF SRI. J.G MADHUSUDHAN DAUGHTER OF LATE. SRI. N.V.MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS NO.5, 2ND FLOOR, 22ND MAIN, JC NAGAR-1, KAVERI NAGAR, KURUBARAHALLI, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 086

¶24

…PETITIONER

¶25

(BY SRI. GEETHA DEVI M P.,ADVOCATE)

¶26

AND:

¶27

SHRI MADHUSUDHAN RAO I G SON OF LATE I.O. GOWRI SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.5, 2ND FLOOR 'A' BLOCK, BBMP QUARTERES MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGE RAMANAGAR, BENGLURU-560 027.

¶28

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT.PRAMILA NESARGI.,SENIOR COUNSEL A/W; SMT. BINDU U.,ADVOCATE)

¶29

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS IN

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶31

M.C.NO. 502 OF 2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BANGALOREDIRECT AND MODIFY THE ORDER DTD 10/02/2023 IN M.C.NO. 502 OF 2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE, AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND AWARD MAINTENANCE AS CLAIMED IN INTERIM APPLICATION I.A.NO. 2 IN M.C.NO. 502/2021.

¶32

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

¶33

Aggrieved by the order passed on I.A. No.2, in M.C. No.502/2021 on the file of the IInd Additional Family Court, Bengaluru, dated 10.02.2023 both the husband and wife are before this court. Questioning the quantum, the husband has filed W.P.No.3602/2024 and the wife has filed W.P.No.14305/2023 seeking enhancement of the compensation. The parties will be referred to as the Husband and Wife for the sake of brevity.

¶34

The wife has filed the petition seeking

¶35

maintenance of an amount of Rs.25,000/- for herself and the minor child who is aged seven years and for his educational expenses. The wife has filed M.C.No.502/2021 for restitution of conjugal rights. The minor daughter is

¶36

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶37

studying in 2^nd standard and the annual fees is Rs.80,000/- p.a., and transportation charges comes to Rs.12,000/-. She has spent an amount of Rs.20,000/towards books, uniform and extra-curricular activities and total expenses is an amount of Rs.1,12,000/- per annum. The respondent/husband was served notice and appeared through an Advocate and he has chosen not to file any objections. Considering the case of the wife, the court below had perused the assets and liabilities of the wife and as no material was filed by the husband, Court below granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month together for the educational expenses of the child including interim maintenance to the wife to be paid by 5^th of every month from the date of the order and whatever expenses that are incurred by the wife towards educational expenses shall be reimbursed. The husband was also directed to bear overall general maintenance and educational expenses of the child for the coming academic year including the interim maintenance.

¶38

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶39

Learned counsel appearing for the wife submits

¶40

that the MC is filed in the year January’2021 and along with that she has file I.A. seeking interim maintenance. Though notices were served and he has appeared through an Advocate, he kept quiet without filing statement of assets and liabilities. An order came to be passed on 10.02.2022 and thereafter the wife has filed W.P. No.14305/2023 in the month of July’2023 and in the year 2024 the husband has come up with W.P.No.3602/2024 questioning the maintenance granted by the court below. It is submitted that the wife and the child who are driven out from the house by the husband are not maintained by the husband. It is submitted that also the manner in which

¶41

the husband has remained silent has not filed the statement of assets and liabilities before the court below and having kept quiet for almost a year and then filing a writ petition before this court after notices are served in the enhancement case filed by the wife, speaks volumes about the conduct of the husband.

¶42

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶43

4. Learned counsel also submits that the Hon’ble

¶44

Apex Court in the case of RAJNEESH VS. NEHA¹ has observed at para-94 as follows -

¶45

“An able-bodied husband must be presumed to be capable of earning sufficient money to maintain his wife and children, and cannot contend that he is not in a position to earn sufficiently to maintain his family he onus is on the husband to establish with necessary material that there are sufficient grounds to show that he is unable to maintain the family, and discharge his legal obligations for reasons beyond his control. If the husband does not disclose the exact amount of his income, an adverse inference may be drawn by the Court”.

¶46

5. Relying on the said judgment learned counsel

¶47

submits that this Court should draw an adverse inference as the husband has failed to state either before this court or before the court below as to what is his income.

¶48

1 AIR 2021 SUPREME COURT 569

¶49

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶50

Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of

¶51

the respondent / husband submits that from the year 2016 as some departmental enquiry is pending against him he is not receiving the salary. When the matter came up on the last occasion on a query by this Court as to what is the amount he is ready to pay, learned Senior Counsel submitted that he has no means and his mother came forward to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- p.m., as maintenance. It is submitted that as this is an exparte order, if the matter is remanded back to the court below felicitating the husband to file his statement of assets and liabilities, the court below can decide the quantum of maintenance.

¶52

Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the entire material on record. The court below had directed the husband to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- p.m., as maintenance, the order came to be passed on 10.02.2023. The husband was served with a notice and he entered appearance and also appointed an

¶53

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶54

Advocate. But for the reasons best known to him he has not filed his statement of assets and liabilities. The court

¶55

below had no other option but to go ahead with the material on record and had granted the maintenance. Aggrieved thereby the wife has come up before this court seeking enhancement in the year 2022, immediately after

¶56

the order was passed. Even then the husband has not reacted and after receiving notice in the case he has come up with the writ petition questioning the order of maintenance granted by the court below. It is pertinent to note here that in the writ petition filed before this Court it is stated that the husband though has signed vakalat and also appointed an Advocate to contest the matter, he could not contest the matter by giving instructions to the Advocate for various reasons both on his personal front and on his professional front. He was not in a position to concentrate on his work and also he has been harassed in all possible ways by the respondent as such he could not instruct his counsel. Now he has come before this court questioning the order. This is what he has stated in the

¶57

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶58

brief facts of the case. Then coming to the grounds, it is stated that the wife herself has estranged from the society and has chosen to file the petition for restitution of conjugal rights only after a period of two years with an ulterior motive. Except these grounds which are referred above and the general grounds nothing has been stated why the maintenance of Rs.10,000/- that is granted by the court below cannot be paid by the husband. He has come up before the court stating that he could not instruct the counsel appearing before the court below to contest the matter and he could not give instruction. Alteast before this Court he has not even chosen to say why the order of the court below is bad and what is his income, why he is not able to pay the maintenance and what are the constraints.

¶59

Learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondent/husband by way of arguments has submitted that the husband is having many difficulties and for that reason he is not able to pay amount. This court is not able

¶60

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶61

to appreciate the arguments, when the husband has filed a petition before this court there should be a specific pleading and there should be some document in support of it and without any averment in the affidavit, just by way of arguments, what is submitted cannot be taken on its face value. The manner in which the writ petition is filed by the husband clearly shows that only with an intention to avoid payment of maintenance to the wife he has come up with this petition. Had it been a genuine case of the husband that he is not having sufficient means to maintain himself or maintain his wife, he would have come up with all the reasons. But except raising grounds which are general in nature nothing has been stated. In view of the same this court finds no reason to entertain the petition filed by the husband and accordingly Writ Petition No. 3602/2024 is liable to be Dismissed .

¶62

Then coming to the writ petition filed by the wife. The court below had reasonably granted an amount

¶63

11 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶64

of Rs.10,000/- as maintenance, but in the order it is stated that the maintenance is granted from the date of order. In all the cases maintenance is granted from the date of petition and in this case also maintenance can be granted only from the date of petition.

¶65

Accordingly, W.P. No. 3602 / 2024 is

¶66

Dismissed and W.P. No. 14305 / 2023 is Disposed Of as follows:

¶67

i) The order passed by the court below dated 10.02.2023 on IA No.2 in M.C.NO. 502/2021 vide ANNEXURE-A, pending on the file of II^ND Additional Family Judge at Bangalore is modified to the extent that the respondent / husband is directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- p.m., towards general maintenance from the date of petition.

¶68

ii) Other conditions that are imposed in the order of the court below stated supra, remains intact.

¶69

12 - NC: 2024:KHC:11305 WP No. 3602 of 2024 C/W WP No. 14305 of 2023

¶70

iii) If the wife has any other material to show the income of the respondent/husband she is always at liberty to move an appropriate application.

¶71

All pending I.A.s shall stand closed.

¶72

SD/JUDGE

¶73

¶74

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Sri. I. G. Madhusudhan Rao v. Smt. Ranjana. M

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri. I. G. Madhusudhan Rao v. Smt. Ranjana. M

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Khasim Vs P U Devadas

Smt. Chandana Muniswamaiah Rameshkumar Vs Ranjith Venkatarajanahalli Srinivasaiah

Dr Mrs Shilpa Ranjan Mulki Vs Dr Dheeraj Kumar

Shri Arunkumar H K Vs Smt Triveni C P

Smt. Tanuja Madhav Vs Sri. Raviraj Chedga

J Gopinath Vs Kousalya Gopinath