Tayappa vs Smt Sevanta
2021 Latest Caselaw 3462 Kant

                         1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
               KALABURAGI BENCH

   DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

                     BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL

              RPFC.No.200090/2018

BETWEEN:

TAYAPPA S/O DAJI MANVAR
AGE: 65 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: ALIGINAL
TQ & DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586 101.       ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. AJAYKUMAR A.K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. SEVANTA W/O TAYAPPA MANVAR
AGE: 60 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O: ALIGINAL
TQ & DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586 101.   ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. S. S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE)

     THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19 (4) OF THE
FAMILY COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN
CRL. MISC.NO.238/2016 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL
PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT VIJAYAPUR AND SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.09.2018 PASSED
BY THE I ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT
VIJAYAPUR IN CRL.MISC.NO.238/2016 AND ETC.,

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
                                2




                           ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 19 (4) of the

Family Court Act by the petitioner aggrieved by the order

dated 22.09.2018 passed in Crl.Misc.No.238/2016 on the

file of the I Additional Prl. Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura.

02. The aforesaid Crl.Misc.No.238/2016 has been

filed by the respondent under Section 125 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure (henceforth referred as 'Cr.P.C.')

seeking maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month. The

learned Family Judge, Vijayapur by an impugned order has

allowed the said petition directing the petitioner herein to

pay Rs.4,000/- per month from the date of petition during

her life time or till she gets remarried whichever is earlier.

It is further directed that the petitioner herein shall pay

the aforesaid maintenance amount by 10th of every month

and in case failure he is liable to pay interest at the rate of

9% p.a. to the respondent herein.

03. The respondent herein in the aforesaid petition

has claimed that she is the legally wedded wife of the

petitioner herein and their marriage purportedly have been

solemnized at about 44-45 years prior to filing of the

petition. The said contentions has been seriously disputed

by the petitioner herein. However, considering the material

evidence placed on record, the Family Judge, Vijayapur by

the impugned judgment allowed the petition with

directions as extracted hereinabove.

04. The learned counsel for the petitioner

reiterating the grounds urged in the petition submits that

the observation of the learned Family Judge, Vijayapur

with regard to the relationship between the petitioner and

the respondent is perverse in as much as there is no

legally acceptable evidence tendered by the respondent

herein in justifying her claim to be a legally wedded wife.

He further submits that the petitioner has legally married

to one Smt. Vachalabai and is blessed with a son from the

said marriage. He further submits that though the

petitioner has preferred the present petition he is

continuing to pay the maintenance amount as per the

order of the Family Judge, Vijayapur. He brought to the

notice of this Court that the respondent herein has filed a

suit in O.S.No.451/2013 on the file of the IV Additional

Civil Judge, Vijayapur for the relief of partition and

separation possession against the petitioner herein and

children of the petitioner. He further submits that the

petitioner herein has sought for a counter claim in the

nature of declaration, declaring that the respondent herein

is not a legally wedded wife of the petitioner. That the said

suit is a comprehensive suit filed before a Court of

competent jurisdiction. Hence, seeks for allowing of the

petition.

05. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the

respondent submits that the Family Judge, Vijayapur has

taken into consideration the pleadings and evidence more

particularly admission on the part of the petitioner as

noted in Para No.6 of the impugned judgment to the effect

that "the respondent came in illegal contact and

relationship with petitioner" and submits that in view of

the said admission nothing remains for consideration with

regard to the legal relationship between the petitioner and

the respondent. However, he does not dispute that the

respondent has filed a suit in O.S.No.451/2013 for

partition and separation possession in which the petitioner

herein has sought for counter claim in the nature of

declaration regarding the relationship.

06. Be that as it may, the proceedings under

Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is in the nature of summary

proceedings. The Family Court has prima-facie found that

the petitioner herein is liable to maintain the respondent

and directed to pay maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month

on the premise that the respondent herein has prima-facie

proved to be the wife of the petitioner. In view of the fact

that the respondent has filed a suit in O.S.No.451/2013

and in which the petitioner herein seeking counter claim in

the nature of decelerating relief with regard to the nature

and character of the relationship, this Court is of the view

that the order of directing the petitioner to pay the

maintenance be continued subject to determination of the

relationship between the parties in a suit in

O.S.No.451/2013.

07. With the above observations, the petition is

disposed off, directing the petitioner to continue to pay

Rs.4,000/- per month towards maintenance of the

respondent subject to determination of their rights in

accordance with law in the suit in O.S.No.451/2013.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KJJ