Sri. Gurulingayya S/O Mahadevayya Vastrad Vs Smt. Akshata W/O Gurulingayya Vastrad — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sri. Gurulingayya S/O Mahadevayya Vastrad Vs Smt. Akshata W/O Gurulingayya Vastrad — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

NC: 2025:KHC-D:5245 RPFC No. 100021 of 2023

1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100021 OF 2023 (-)

BETWEEN:

SRI. GURULINGAYYA S/O. MAHADEVAYYA VASTRAD, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: PEON, R/A. C/O. S.S. KAINUR, ”MATOSHREE NILAYA”, NOW AT NEAR WATER TANK, BIJAPUR ROAD, DEVARHIPERIGI, VIJAYAPURA-586115. PREVIOUSLY RESIDING AT NEAR SIDDESHWAR TEMPLE, MATHAPATI GALLI, VIJAYAPUR.

…PETITIONER

(BY SMT. DEEPA PAVAN DODDATTI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.03.22 15:55:09 +0530

SMT. AKSHATA W/O. GURULINGAYYA VASTRAD, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. C/O. SMT. BASAVAMMA SHIVANAND KASHIMATH, TENGENMAT ROAD, OPP. MUCHAKANDI SWAMI HOUSE, BAGALKOT-587101.

VIHARIKA D/O. GURULINGAYYA VASTRAD, AGE: 08 YEARS, OCC: NIL, THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHIVA SHIRUR, ADVOCATE)

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5245 RPFC No. 100021 of 2023

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.01.2023 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BAGALKOT IN CRL.MISC. NO.116/2019 (OLD CRL MISC NO. 31/2018) BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the respondent –

husband challenging the order dated 12.01.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.116/2019 (old Crl.Misc.No.31/2018) on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkote¹ granting maintenance to the respondents herein.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court.

It is the case of the petitioners before the

Family Court that the marriage between the petitioner

1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5245 RPFC No. 100021 of 2023

No.1 with the respondent – husband was solemnized on 27.02.2015 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent was not taking care of the petitioners and was not providing basic necessities to the petitioners and as such the petitioners have left the matrimonial home and accordingly filed Crl.Misc.No.116/2019 before the Family Court seeking maintenance from the respondent.

After service of notice, the respondent – husband entered appearance and filed detailed statement objection contending that the petitioner have left the matrimonial home on their own without any cause and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition.

The Family Court after considering the material

on record, by its order dated 12.01.2023, allowed the petition in part by directing the respondent – husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.8,000/- to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,000/- to petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:5245 RPFC No. 100021 of 2023

by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this petition.

I have heard Smt.Deepa Pavan Doddatti,

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Shiva Shirur, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the award of maintenance by the Family Court is on the higher side and further the net salary of the petitioner is Rs.20,829/- and if he is directed to pay the maintenance of Rs.11,000/-, it is argued that it is difficult for the petitioner to survive and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents

sought to justify the impugned order and accordingly

sought for dismissal of the petition.

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner No.1 married the respondent - husband on 27.02.2015 and in their

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5245 RPFC No. 100021 of 2023

wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. Perusal of the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the parties are residing separately. It is also forthcoming from the finding recorded by the Family Court that, the respondent - husband is working at Karnataka Vikas Grameen Bank and as per the finding at Para No.21, the salary of respondent - husband is Rs.27,849/- as on 30.06.2022. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration the fact that the respondents herein are residing at Bagalkote city, the grant of maintenance by the Family Court is just and proper and does not call for interference in this petition.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.

Sd/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

SH

CT-MCK, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13