Sri V Kumar vs Smt M P Kumari
2022 Latest Caselaw 4814 Kant

                              1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                            BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

          CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.388/2022

BETWEEN:

SRI V. KUMAR,
S/O T.K. VASUDEVA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT NO.739, DASANAYANA BEEDI,
T.NARASIPURA TOWN,
MYSURU DISTRICT-571 124.                      ... PETITIONER

                (BY SRI M.VINAY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. M.P.KUMARI,
W/O V.KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT NO.227/7, 2ND CROSS,
JETTI BEEDI, NAZARBAD,
MYSURU-570 010.                              ... RESPONDENT

     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTIONS 397 READ WITH 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC, T.NARASIPURA, PASSED AN ORDER IN
CRL.MISC.NO.191/2013 DATED 14.08.2020 AND THE JUDGMENT
PASSED BY THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU IN
CRL. APPEAL NO.40/2021 DATED 29.12.2021 AND ALLOW THIS
CRL.R.P.

    THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                    2



                             ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent

herein had approached the Trial Court by filing

Crl.Misc.(D.V.C.)No.191/2013 seeking maintenance from the

petitioner herein invoking Section 12 of the Protection of Women

from Domestic Violence Act and seeking the relief under Sections

18, 19 and 20 of the Act. The Trial Court after considering the

material on record, allowed the petition directing the petitioner

to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month from the date of

petition till the date of order and also directed to pay an amount

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

date of order till modification or until further orders. Hence, an

appeal was filed before the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.40/2021.

The Appellate Court on reconsideration of the material, while

dismissing the appeal has observed that earlier interim

maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month was awarded and the

same was challenged in Crl.A.No.156/2014 and the same was

dismissed vide order dated 17.08.2014. Now, only from the

date of order instead of Rs.3,000/-, Rs.4,000/- has been ordered

and the reasons has been assigned in paragraph Nos.17, 18 and

19 and dismissed the appeal.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend

that the maintenance awarded is exorbitant and the petitioner is

running only a petty business and both the Courts have not

considered the contradictions elicited from the mouth of P.W.1.

The learned counsel submits that MFA is pending before this

Court since the petitioner has filed the petition for divorce on the

ground of desertion and the same is for consideration. The said

contention cannot be accepted and the same is on account of

filing of the petition on the ground of desertion and the fact that

the interim maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month was awarded

is not in dispute and the same was confirmed in appeal and now

only from the date of order, maintenance was awarded at the

rate of Rs.4,000/- per month and considered the maintenance of

Rs.3,000/- per month from the date of petition till the date of

order. Having considered the reasons given by the Trial Court

and the dismissal of appeal, I do not find any error committed by

both the Courts in awarding maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per

month considering the cost of living at present. Hence, I do not

find any merit in the petition to issue notice against the

respondent.

4. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

following:

ORDER

The petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MD