Ravikumar Vs Jayalakshmi — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

Ravikumar Vs Jayalakshmi — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

RPFC allowed with modification of the Family Court's order: the wife (No.1) is not entitled to interim maintenance; the minor child (No.2) retains interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application till the disposal of the main petition.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent-wife, having undertaken in the mutual-consent divorce proceedings (M.C.No.35/2023) not to claim any maintenance from the petitioner-husband, remains entitled to the interim maintenance granted by the Family Court under Section 144(2) BNSS.

Court's answer

Since the respondent-wife had, in the mutual-consent divorce proceedings (M.C.No.35/2023), clearly stated that she would not claim any maintenance from the petitioner, this Court found it just and reasonable to modify the Family Court's order to the extent that petitioner No.1 (wife) is not entitled to interim maintenance.

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner No.2, the minor child, is entitled to interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application till the disposal of the main petition; this entitlement was left intact when the order was modified.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (NC: 2026:KHC:33281) — Oral order of Hon'ble Mrs. Justice P Sree Sudha, dated 03-07-2026, on RPFC No. 82 of 2026, admitted and decided the same day. The revision petition, filed under Section 96 CPC by Ravikumar (husband), challenged the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hassan's decree dated 18.02.2026 on I.A.No.2 in OS/Crl.Misc.No.174/2025, which had allowed the wife Jayalakshmi's application under Section 144(2) BNSS and granted interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to her and to the minor daughter Druthi (represented by her mother) from the date of filing until disposal of the main petition. Observing that in the mutual-consent divorce proceedings M.C.No.35/2023 the wife had clearly stated she would claim no maintenance from the petitioner, the Court found it just and reasonable to modify the Family Court's order so that the wife receives no interim maintenance, while the minor child continues to receive Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of filing till disposal of the main petition. With this modification, the RPFC was allowed.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:33281 RPFC No. 82 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

RPFC NO. 82 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

RAVIKUMAR

S/O VANKETESH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT JODIKRISHNAPURA VILLAGE, DUDAHOBLI, HASSAN TALUK HASSAN - 573 201.

…PETITIONER

(BY SMT. KAVITHA H.C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. JAYALAKSHMI

W/O RAVIKUMAR

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

DRUTHI

D/O RAVIKUMAR

AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS (SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1,

BOTH RESPONDENT 1 AND 2 R/AT JODI KRISHNAPURA BVILLAGE DUDHA HOBLI, HASSAN - 573 201

ALSO R/AT KADALU VILLAGE,

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:33281 RPFC No. 82 of 2026

HC-KAR

KUNDURU HOBLI, ALUR TALUK, HASSAN - 573 201.

…RESPONDENTS

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.02.2026 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 IN OS.NO.174/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HASSAN, ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.2 FILED UNDER SECTION 144(2) OF BNSS.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

ORAL ORDER

This RPFC is filed against the order dated 18.02.2026

passed by the Family Court in Crl.Misc.No.174/2025 in I.A. No.2, the application filed by the wife seeking interim maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month. The Family Court held that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are entitled to interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application till the disposal of the main petition.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:33281 RPFC No. 82 of 2026

HC-KAR

Being aggrieved by the said order, the present

RPFC is filed by husband in which it is stated that the Court below has not taken into consideration that the respondent/wife has agreed in M.C.No.35/2023 i.e., mutual consent divorce proceedings that she will not claim

any maintenance from the petitioner. It is further contended that the petitioner is doing coolie work and has limited source of income. The petitioner handed over the relevant documents and furniture to the respondent under the mutual proceedings. As the petitioner has no source of income, as she undertook not to claim maintenance, they requested this Court to modify the order of the Court saying that only second petitioner/minor child is entitled for Rs.5,000/-. This Court has perused the terms and conditions entered between the parties at the time of taking mutual divorce. In the said proceedings the respondent-wife clearly stated that she will not claim any maintenance from the petitioner. Therefore, this Court finds it just and reasonable to modify the order of the

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:33281 RPFC No. 82 of 2026

HC-KAR

Family Court to an extent that petitioner No.1 (wife) is not entitled to interim maintenance. However, petitioner No.2 being the minor child, is entitled to interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application till the disposal of the main petition.

With the said modification, the RPFC is

allowed.

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

AMA List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2