Dismissed¶51

Hajira Kouser v. Ashiff Ahamed

Karnataka HC2 Feb 2026RPFC/164/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RPFC No. 164 of 2020, High Court of Karnataka, decided 02.02.2026; revision under Section 19(4) Family Courts Act, 1984 against Family Court Kolar order dated 06.07.2020 in Crl.Misc.(F.C.) No.43/2018; Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance adequacy; wife's claim of Rs.20,000/- per month versus awarded Rs.5,000/- per month; interim maintenance Rs.6,000/- per month pendente lite; husband's salary around Rs.26,000/- per month; dependants include aged mother and physically disabled nephew; Pw.2 admissions on poverty and obligations; revision petition dismissed; impugned order upheld.

What did the court decide?

The High Court held that the Family Court did not err in concluding that Rs.5,000/- per month was the amount awardable towards maintenance, and that there was no infirmity in the impugned order. ¶50

Hajira Kouser Vs Ashiff Ahamed — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:5819 RPFC No. 164 of 2020

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 164 OF 2020

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

HAJIRA KOUSER W/O. ASHIFF AHAMED AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/O. NO.334, 1^ST MAIN ROAD 2^ND CROSS, FORT, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-KOLAR-563 101

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

(BY SRI MAHESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI TIGADI VEERANNA GADIGEPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

ASHIFF AHAMED S/O. ABDUL RAVOOF AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS STORE KEEPER, WORKING IN

¶14

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:5819 RPFC No. 164 of 2020

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

VISHAL PRESSION STEEL

¶17

TUBE AND PIPES (P) LTD.

BLOCK 47, KIDB

INDUSTRIAL AREA

HOSAKOTE

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 114

¶22

…RESPONDENT

¶23

(BY SMT. SHARVANI P. T., ADVOCATE)

¶24

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.07.2020 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.(F.C) NO.43/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT KOLAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF CR.P.C. FOR MAINTENANCE.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:5819 RPFC No. 164 of 2020

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

Heard Sri.Mahesh Kumar who represents Sri.Veeranna.G.Tigadi, learned counsel on record for the petitioner as well as Ms.Sharvani.P.T who represents Sri.Rahul.S.Reddy, learned counsel on record for the respondent.

¶32

Challenge in this revision petition is the order that is rendered by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Kolar, in Crl.Misc.No.43/2018 dated 06.07.2020.

¶33

The petitioner herein who is the wife of the respondent filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C seeking maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month. The Court through the impugned order directed the respondent/ husband to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month towards maintenance. The version of the petitioner/wife is that she is entitled to a higher sum.

¶34

Making his submission on the merits of the

¶35

matter, learned counsel for the petitioner states that

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:5819 RPFC No. 164 of 2020

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

petitioner has got no source of income. She is depending

¶39

upon her parents to eke out her livelihood. It is the bounden duty of the respondent to maintain the petitioner. Learned counsel also states that an interim order was passed granting Rs.6,000/per month towards maintenance pendente lite. However, finally the Family Court held that the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,000/- only as maintenance which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel thereby seeks to allow the revision petition.

¶40

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that respondent is under obligation to maintain his aged mother. His father recently passed away. He incurred huge debt to attend the medical needs of his father and the respondent has to clear those debts. Learned counsel also submits that respondent gets around Rs.26,000/- per month as salary and with the said meagre amount he has to maintain himself, his mother, was looking after his father's needs till his death and also his

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:5819 RPFC No. 164 of 2020

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

nephew who is suffering with physical disability. Learned counsel thereby seeks to dismiss the revision petition.

¶45

The Court appreciating each and every aspect of the case including the evidence produced came to a conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance. The Court clearly made a mention in the impugned order regarding the admissions of Pw.2 during the course of cross examination. Pw.2 admitted that the respondent herein resides in a old house with his parents and a handicapped boy. He also admitted that respondent is required to take care of his aged parents. He further admitted that family of respondent is poor.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner did not deny the fact that the respondent is earning around Rs.26,000/per month. Through the said meagre amount, the respondent is under obligation to maintain himself, his mother and also to provide maintenance to his wife i.e.,

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:5819 RPFC No. 164 of 2020

¶48

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

the petitioner herein. Thus this Court is of the view that the Family Court did not err in coming to a conclusion that the amount that can be awarded towards maintenance is Rs.5,000/- per month. Also, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order.

¶51

Thus the revision petition stands dismissed .

¶52

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶53

NS CT:VC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Hajira Kouser v. Ashiff Ahamed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hajira Kouser v. Ashiff Ahamed

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Amaresh Reddy Vs Nithyashree @ Hansika-Raksha a

Sri Suddep a I Vs Smt Roopa B R

Mr Rohit Khajuria Vs Mrs Sushma (Muthamma) Madappa

Mr D Viswanath Vs Smt Mamta @ Mamta Vishwanath

Xxxx (Vide Order dated 24.04.2026) Vs Xxxx

Sri Venkatesh C T Vs Smt Yogeshwari J