K S Swaroopa Immanuel vs Shashi Kala
2021 Latest Caselaw 5579 Kant

                            1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                        BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

        WRIT PETITION NO.52985/2017 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

K.S. SWAROOP IMMANUEL
S/O K. SYAM SUNDAR PRASAD,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 8, ANTHONY SWAMY LAYOUT,
LINGARAJAPURAM,BANGALORE - 560 084.      ... PETITIONER

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

AND

SHASHI KALA,
D/O MARIAN C, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 66, SHAMANA NAGAR,
BEHIND LOKESH TENT,
LINGARAJAPURAM,
BANGALORE - 560 084                     ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. H.A. MANJUNATHA PRASANNA, ADVOCATE )

     THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTCLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDERS DTD.2.8.2017 VIDE ANNEX-E IN M.C.NO.2722/2014
PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDITIONAL FAMILY JUDGE AT BANGALORE
AND ETC.

      THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
- B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                    2




                             ORDER

Interim order dated 02.08.2017 passed in M.C.

No.2722/2014 on the file of the I Additional Family

Judge, Bengaluru, awarding Rs.5,000/- per month

towards interim maintenance and Rs.10,000/- towards

the cost of the litigation in favour of the wife against the

husband has given a cause of action to the

husband/petitioner to invoke jurisdiction of this Court

under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of

RAJNESH vs NEHA AND ANOTHER reported in

(2021)2 SCC 324, while discussing the scope and ambit

of applications seeking maintenance under different

enactments, has issued certain guidelines to be followed

while deciding the application seeking

maintenance/alimony payable to the aggrieved parties.

Placing reliance on the aforementioned Judgment,

learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

matter requires to be remanded to the Family Court,

directing the parties to furnish statement of assets and

liabilities. The learned counsel would further submit that

an application filed by the husband to summon certain

documents pertaining to the income of the

respondent/wife is pending consideration before the

Family Court. The learned counsel would further submit

that after furnishing the statement of assets and

liabilities in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court

referred above, the Family Court may pass appropriate

order fixing the entitlement/liability of the parties to the

proceeding.

3. It is further submitted by the learned counsel

for the petitioner that the respondent/wife is employed

and is having more income than the present petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent would

submit that necessary statement relating to assets and

liabilities of the respondent/wife would be submitted

before the Family court to enable the Family Court to

pass an order on the application seeking interim

maintenance and cost of litigation.

5. The submissions of the learned counsel for the

parties are placed on record.

6. Since, this Court is not going into the merits of

the claim of the respective parties on the interim

application seeking maintenance, the matter is remitted

back to the Family Court to consider the interim

application No.5 dated 01.03.2016 in M.C.

No.2772/2014 on the file of I Additional Family Court at

Bengaluru for fresh adjudication in accordance with law

on the basis of statement of assets and liabilities to be

furnished by the parties. Hence, the following:

ORDER

(1) The matter is remanded to the Family Court to re-

consider the application afresh on the basis of assets

and liability statement to be furnished by the parties.

The parties to the proceeding shall furnish the statement

of assets and liabilities within a period of 15 days from

the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

(2) It is also made clear that this Court has not

expressed any opinion on the merits of the interim

application dated 01.03.2016 and Family Court to decide

the same on the basis of materials to be placed by the

parties.

(3) Since this Court has not gone into the validity or

correctness of the impugned order at Annexure - A, by

way of an interim arrangement, the liability of the

petitioner (respondent before Family Court) to pay

interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month shall

continue till the disposal of interim application NO.5

dated 01.03.2016, on merit.

(4) Considering the fact that the petition is of the year

2014, the Family Court is expected to expedite hearing

of both interim application No.5 seeking maintenance

and main petition.

The writ petition is disposed of in terms referred

above.

Sd/-

JUDGE

brn