Shri Mayur Nayak Vs Smt H Aparna Pai

SMT H.APARNA PAI DAUGHTER OF SHRI H. NARSIMHA PAI WIFE OF SHRI MAYUR NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.73, MIG NITYANAND, KHB COLONY, 17^TH F MAIN, 5^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU – 560 095.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SMT.PRATHIMA S.K., ADVOCATE)

¶21

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

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶23

2 -

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

G AND WC NO. 349 OF 2022 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU.

¶26

IN WP NO. 4376/2024

¶27

BETWEEN:

¶28

APARNA PAI W/O MAYUR NAYAK AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO 73, MIG NITYANANDA, KHB COLONY, 17^TH F MAIN, 5^TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE- 560 095

¶29

...PETITIONER

¶30

(BY SRI. PRATHIMA S K.,ADVOCATE)

¶31

AND:

¶32

MAYUR NAYAK S/O A.RAGHUPATHI NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.MF/2, BDA FLATS, CAMBRIDGE LAYOUT BENGALURU -560 008

¶33

...RESPONDENT

¶34

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

¶35

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.11.23 VIDE ANNEXURE-J PASSED BY THE HON’BLE V ADDL. PRINCIPLE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE ON IA NO. 3 AND 4 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 26 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶36

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶37

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶40

ORAL ORDER

¶41

Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.Nos.8 to 10 in G & WC.No.349/2022 dated 03.04.2024 by the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, W.P.No.14708/2024 is filed by the father and aggrieved by the order passed I.A.Nos.3 and 4 in M.C.No.6941/2022 by the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, W.P.No.4376/2024 is filed by the mother.

¶42

The parties are referred to as father and mother for the sake of convenience.

¶43

W.P.No.14708/2024 is filed by the father, whereby

¶44

the Family Court had permitted the father to participate in the school meetings without making any nuisance and affecting the future of the child. Further, the father is permitted to make audio (voice) calls, video calls and talk with the child between 7.00 pm. and 8.00 pm. on alternate days. Further, he is permitted to take interim custody of the child from 9.00 am. to 6.00 pm. on every Sundays and 50% of the holidays during summer vacation, Dasara vacation and winter vacation and the father is directed to take care of the needs of the child while in

¶45

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

his custody and also directed not to give objectionable food/ snacks/beverages to the child during his custody and mother is also directed not to give any ill-advice against the father, aggrieved thereby the father is before this Court.

¶48

W.P.No.4376/2024 is filed by the mother, whereby

¶49

the Family Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month and 50% of the educational expenses of the child from the year 2021 till disposal of the petition.

¶50

Learned counsel appearing for the father submits

¶51

that the Family Court had granted 50% of the custody during the holidays and when it comes to the visitation, the Family Court had granted only from 9.00 am. to 6.00 pm. on every Sunday. It is submitted that when the boy is comfortable with the father, the Family Court ought to have granted overnight custody every week to the father. It is further submitted that I.A.No.8 is filed by the father seeking access to school portal and permit him to participate in the school activities i.e., parents teacher meeting, school day, sports day, school fest and such other school activities organized at the school. Learned counsel submits that the said relief was not granted by

¶52

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

the Family Court. However, he is permitted to participate in the school meetings without making any nuisance and affecting the future of the child. It is further submitted that as the father is not having the access to the school portal, he is not able to have complete information with regard to several aspects and there is no basis for the Court not to grant the access to the father.

¶55

Learned counsel appearing for the mother submits that the writ petition that is filed by the mother is seeking enhancement of maintenance amount granted by the Family Court. According to the mother, when the father is earning more than the mother, the expenses have to be borne proportionally.

¶56

Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. This Court has interacted with the parties and also the learned counsels for both the parties have made their efforts to see that there is some consensus between the parties. The father had already filed an I.A. before the Family Court seeking modification of the impugned order passed in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 as the father’s salary earlier was

¶57

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

Rs.3,35,000/-, now his salary is Rs.75,000/- per month. Hence, in the changed circumstances where the salary has been reduced he had filed an application seeking modification of the order. Today, the learned counsel for the mother submits that if the father continues to pay maintenance of an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month and 50% of the educational expenses and the amounts that are paid for the extracurricular activities, and also not press the I.A. filed on 16.01.2025 seeking modification of the order dated 18.12.2023 in M.C.No.6941/2022 for reduction of the maintenance, they will not press for enhancement. The petitioner/father is present before this Court. On instructions learned counsel for the father submits that it is acceptable for the father.

¶60

Then coming to the overnight custody, the father is already having custody of the child for 50% of the summer vacation, Dasara vacation and winter vacation. But when it comes to the weekly visitation, the Family Court had granted from 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on every Sunday. Hence, this court deems it appropriate to pass the following:

¶61

NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶62

7 -

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

ORDER

¶65

i. The father is permitted to have the overnight custody of the child on 1^st and 3^rd Saturdays between *Saturday 4.00 pm. to Sunday 6.00 pm.

¶66

ii. The father can pick up the child at 04.00 pm. on Saturday and shall drop the child back at 6.00 pm. on Sunday.

¶67

iii. The father can exercise the visitation on 2^nd and 4^th Saturday between 9.00 am. and 7.00 pm.

¶68

iv. Then coming to I.A.No.8 is concerned, the mother shall include the father's name in the online portal of the school so that the father will have the access to the information.

¶69

v. The Family Court had already passed an order that the father is permitted to participate in school meetings without making any nuisance and affecting the future of the child and that should continue.

¶70

vi. Accordingly, W.P.No.14708/2024 filed by the father is disposed of .

¶71

Corrected vide court order dated: 21/07/2025.

¶72

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:24308 WP No. 14708 of 2024 C/W WP No. 4376 of 2024

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

vii. The petition filed by the mother is disposed off observing that the father will withdraw the I.A. filed seeking modification of the interim maintenance order and shall continue to pay the maintenance as granted by the Family Court and shall also continue to pay the expenses for the extracurricular activities.

¶75

viii. Accordingly, W.P.No.4376/2024 filed by the mother is disposed of .

¶76

ix. All I.As., in both the writ petitions shall stand closed.

¶77

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶78

BN

¶79

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

Shri Mayur Nayak v. Smt H Aparna Pai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Mayur Nayak v. Smt H Aparna Pai

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

Kum U Divya Vs Sri Murali M

Smt. Padmaja Gogi Vs Madhu S Rao

Puneesh S Vs Sandhya

Sri.Harish S Vs Smt.Amulya.K

Mr. Shankar Chowdhury Vs Ms. Payal Bhowmick

Smt Leena Abraham Vs Byju Joseph