Ravi S Vs Prathima R — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

Ravi S Vs Prathima R — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Revision petition allowed; impugned order dated 22.04.2024 in Crl. Misc. No.991/2023 set aside; matter remanded to the Family Court to consider afresh and pass orders; pendente lite interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month payable by petitioner to respondent from the date of filing of Crl. Misc. No. 991/2023 till disposal; all arrears to be cleared within 3 months; both parties to appear before the Family Court on 18.03.2026; disposal preferably within 6 months; I.A. No. 1/2025 closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether, given the disputed service of notice and the petitioner's assertion that he received no notice and could not file his objections or assets-liabilities statement, the ex parte maintenance order dated 22.04.2024 should be set aside so that the petitioner may project his version regarding his financial capacity and liability to pay maintenance. +1 more

Court's answer

This Court held that, as per the petitioner's version he did not receive notice at all, and since he intends to project his version regarding his financial capacity and his liability to pay maintenance, a fair opportunity was required to be given to him; therefore the Court considered it desirable to set aside the impugned order dated 22.04.2024.

Ratio / Principle

To protect the respondent's interests, the Court directed the petitioner to pay her pendente lite interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month from the date of filing of Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 991/2023 till disposal, with all arrears to be cleared within 3 months.

Key takeaways

The pendente lite grant does not in any way deprive the petitioner of the right to take appropriate defence, and the Family Court is directed to dispose of the matter without being influenced by the sum fixed by this Court towards maintenance pendente lite.obiter¶56

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

RPFC (under Sec.19(4), Family Courts Act) by husband RAVI S against the order dated 22.04.2024 of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru, in Crl. Misc. No.991/2023 (petition under Sec.125 Cr.P.C.), whereby the Family Court, after placing him ex parte, fixed maintenance at Rs.12,000/- per month (against respondent's claim of Rs.25,000/- per month plus Rs.25,000/- litigation expenses). Petitioner contended he never received notice, was already paying Rs.5,000/- per month under an agreement in the pending dissolution-of-marriage petition (aggregate Rs.17,000/- per month), and sought setting aside. High Court of Karnataka (Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha, 09.02.2026): noting that notice ultimately stood served on him personally though he remained absent, yet to enable him to project his financial capacity and maintenance liability, the Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the Family Court for fresh consideration; pendente lite interim maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month was fixed from the date of filing of Crl. Misc. No.991/2023 till disposal, arrears to be cleared within 3 months; parties to appear before the Family Court on 18.03.2026; disposal preferably within 6 months; the interim figure does not bind the Family Court and does not prejudice the petitioner's defences; I.A. No.1/2025 closed.