Shri. Bahubali S/O Paris ... vs Smt. Ratnavva Paris Jakkannavar
2022 Latest Caselaw 7762 Kant

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                     DHARWAD BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2022

                          BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

                RPFC NO.100177 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

SHRI BAHUBALI
S/O PARIS JAKKANNAVAR
AGE 46 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O BASTAVAD (HALAGA)
TALUK AND DISTRICT BELAGAVI
PIN 590 020
                                              ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

  1. SMT. RATNAVVA PARIS JAKKANNAVAR
     AGE ABOUT 66 YEARS
     OCC: HOUEHOLD WORK
     R/O H.NO.236/1, MAIN ROAD
     AT POST ALARWAD
     TALUK AND DISTRICT BELAGAVI
     PIN 590 020

  2. SHRI PARIS DEVAPPA JAKKANNAVAR
     AGE 80 YEARS
     OCC: AGRICULTURE
     R/O H.NO.236/1, MAIN ROAD
     AT POST ALARWAD
                                 2




      TALUK AND DISTRICT BELAGAVI
      PIN 590 020
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(RESPONDENT NO.1 SERVED)

     THIS REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4)
OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 01.10.2015 IN CRIMINAL MISC.NO.201 OF 2014
ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BELAGAVI, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF
CR.P.C..

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

                           ORDER

This Revision Petition is filed by the respondent No.2 in

Cri.Misc.No.201 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court, Belagavi

challenging the order dated 01st October, 2015, allowing the

petition in part.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties in this petition are

referred to with their status and rank before the Family Court.

3. It is the case of the petitioner before the family Court

that she is the legally wedded wife of respondent No.1 and

mother of the second respondent therein. It is further averred in

the claim petition that the respondent No.1 has neglected the

petitioner and tried to transfer the property in favour of the

respondent No.2 therein and accordingly, dispute having arisen

in the family, the petitioner left the matrimonial home and as

she being aged lady and having no means to maintain herself,

the petitioner has filed C.Misc. No.201 of 2014 before the family

Court, seeking maintenance.

4. On service of notice, first respondent did not appear

before the Court and accordingly placed ex-parte. The claim

petition was resisted by the second respondent. In order to

prove the case, petitioner was examined as PW1 and produced

five documents and same were marked as Exhibits P1 to P5. On

other hand, no evidence was adduced by the respondent. The

Family Court, after considering the material on record, by its

order dated 01st October, 2015 allowed the Claim petition in part

and directed the second respondent therein to pay monthly

maintenance of Rs.3,500/- and being aggrieved by the same,

respondent No.2 has preferred this revision petition.

5. Petitioner has been represented by learned counsel Sri

Sangram S. Kulkarni and there is no representation on behalf of

respondent.

6. Shri Sangram S. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner contended that the petitioner herein is the

step-son of the respondent No.1 and therefore, in view of the

law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

KIRTIKAND D. VADODARIA v. STATE OF GUJARAT AND

ANOTHER reported in (1996)4 SCC 479, the step-mother is not

entitled for the maintenance from the step-son, if he is having

any other children. In the light of the submission made by the

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and on examination

of the finding recorded by the family Court, it is not in dispute

that respondent No.1 herein is the legally wedded wife of the

second respondent herein. First respondent herein having two

daughters and the petitioner herein is the step-son of the

respondent No.1. In this regard, I have carefully considered the

law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of KIRTIKANT

(supra) wherein at paragraph 11 of the judgment, the Hon'ble

Apex Court held as follows:

"11) Admittedly, the expressions "mother" and "step-mother" have not been defined either in the Code or in the General Clauses Act. These expressions have also not been defined by the Hindu Law or the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 or by any other Law. As stated earlier. all that the explanation attached to Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 provides is that the Expression "parent" includes a childless step-mother. His being the position, we have to resort to the dictionary meaning and the meaning in which these expressions are commonly understood in the popular sense. In the Permanent Edition or WORDS AND PHRASES, VOLUME 27A, at page 348, the word "mother" has been given the meaning to denote a woman who has borne a child or a female parent, especially one of the human race. In Volume 40 of the said Permanent Edition of WORDS AND PHRASE. at page 145. The expression "step-mother" has been given the meaning as to be the 'wife of one's father by virtu of marriage subsequent to that of which the person spoken of is the offspring. It has been further stated that a "step-mother" is a relative by affinity and the relationship continues after the death of the father. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 5th Edition, at page 913, has given the meaning of "mother" as a woman who has borne a child, a female parent. Further,

at page 1268, the meaning of "step- mother" is stated to mean the wife of one's father by virtue of a marriage subsequent to that of which the person spoken of is the offspring. Similarly, in THE SHORTER OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY, volume II, at page 1360, the meaning of the word "mother" is given as a woman who has given birth to a child or a female parent, and at page 12122, expression "step-mother" has been assigned the meaning as The wife of one's father by a subsequent marriage. According to Webster Dictionary (international Edition), the expression "mother" means a female parent and that which was produced or given birth to anyone. Thus, on a conspectus view of dictionary meaning of the two expressions - "mother" and "step-mother" in various dictionaries, it clearly emerges that there is inherent distinction between the status of a mother and 'step- mother' and they are two distinct and separate entities and both could not be assigned the same meaning. The expression "mother" clearly means only the natural mother who has given birth to the child and not the one who is the wife of one's father by another marriage."

7. Undoubtedly, the expression "step-mother" has not

been defined in Code of Criminal Procedure or in the General

Clauses Act, 1897 and therefore, taking into consideration the

law declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court I am of the view that the

petitioners herein have made out a case for setting aside the

order dated 01st October, 2015 and as such, the Family Court

has not properly considered the aforementioned case with regard

to the right of the step-mother claiming maintenance form the

step-son, which needs to be reconsidered by the Family Court

afresh. Accordingly, it is a fit case to remand the matter to the

Family Court to consider the case on merits in terms of the law

declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court and pass suitable orders. In

the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

1. Revision petition is allowed;

2. Order dated 01st October, 2015 in Cri. Misc.

No.201 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court,

Belagavi, is set aside by remanding the matter

to the Family Court for fresh consideration after

affording opportunity to both the sides.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE Ln,