Sri Deepak Jain Vs Smt Khushbu Jain

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984 PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE CASE C.M. 277/2023 FROM THE COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI AND ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI, PASSED IN C.M. 277/2023 DATED 17.02.2024 TO THIS PETITION.

¶23

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

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

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶27

This petition is filed by the respondent in Crl.Misc.277/2003 challenging the order dated 17.02.2024 on the file of I-Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi (for short “Family Court”).

¶28

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

¶29

It is the case of the petitioners (wife and children)

¶30

in Crl.Misc.No.277/2003 that the marriage between petitioner No.1 and the respondent was solemnized on 17.06.2007 and in

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:410 RPFC No. 100158 of 2024

¶32

their wedlock two children were born i.e., petitioner No.2 and 3. It is further stated in the claim petition that the respondenthusband has neglected to maintain the petitioners and not even provided basic needs to them and as such, the petitioners left the matrimonial home and started residing with the parents of petitioner No.1. It is also stated in the claim petition that the respondent-husband is running a wholesale grocery business at Jobner of Rajasthan and therefore, the petitioners alleged that they havd no means of livelihood and accordingly sought for maintenance from the respondent-husband.

¶33

After service of notice, the respondent-husband received notice however refused to attend the proceedings before the Family Court. Accordingly, the respondent-husband was placed ex-parte. The Family Court, after considering the material on record, by its order dated 17.02.2024 directed the respondent-husband to pay monthly maintenance of ₹10,000/to petitioner No.1 and ₹4,000/- each to petitioner No.2 and 3. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent has presented this petition.

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC-D:410 RPFC No. 100158 of 2024

¶36

I have heard Sri. S.N.Rajendra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Veeresh S Sajjan for respondents herein.

¶37

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents herein have left the matrimonial home without any cause and the petitioner herein is ready to accept the respondents. He also submitted that the impugned order is passed placing the petitioner herein as ex-parte and accordingly, sought for an opportunity to defend the matter.

¶38

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents herein justifies the impugned order.

¶39

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perusal of the impugned order would indicate that the petitioner herein has been placed ex-parte before the Court below despite the notice has been served to the petitioner herein. Taking into account the averments made in the petition and in order to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner herein, I am of the view that it is a fit case to remand the matter to the Family Court for providing an opportunity to

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:410 RPFC No. 100158 of 2024

¶41

the parties and to pass appropriate orders on merit. In the result, I pass the following:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

i) The Petition is allowed.

¶44

ii) The order dated 17.02.2024 in Crl.Misc.277/2003 passed by the I-Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the Family Court for fresh disposal after providing opportunity to both the sides.

¶45

iii) In order to avoid further delay in the matter, as the learned counsel appearing for the parties are present before this Court, the parties are directed to appear before the Family Court on 07.02.2025 at 11.00 a.m., without waiting for further notice from the Family Court.

¶46

iv) It is also clarified that till the conclusion of the proceedings before the Family Court, the petitioner herein (husband) shall pay maintenance of ₹15,000/- per month to the respondents herein for their livelihood without fail and any default, if any, the Family Court shall take appropriate decision as such.

¶47

6 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC-D:410 RPFC No. 100158 of 2024

¶49

v) Registry is directed to release the maintenance amount deposited by the petitioner herein, if any, in favour of the respondents herein forthwith after due identification.

¶50

Sd/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶51

YAN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

Sri Deepak Jain v. Smt Khushbu Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Deepak Jain v. Smt Khushbu Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi S/O Shivaputrappa Pujar Vs Smt. Saroja W/O Ravi Pujar

Sri. Katta Ashwini Kumar S/O Katta Srinivas Vs Smt. Katta Srilakshmi W/O Sri Katta Ashwin Kumar

Sri Raghavendra Swamy Mutt Reptd by Its Vs Sri Uttaradi Mutt

S T Karthik Vs Sujatha S Eeleger

Sri.Ravindra S/O Venkatarmana Bhat Vs Smt.Parvati W/O Prabhakar Raikar

Sri Karthik Patil S/O Late Basavana Gouda Vs Smt Lavanya Alia Ashwini W/O Karthik Patil