Sri Shivaraj D vs Smt Manjula D L
2023 Latest Caselaw 5788 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                          NC: 2023:KHC:29529
                                                        WP No. 16854 of 2023




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                       DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                            BEFORE

                       THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 16854 OF 2023 (GM-FC)

                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI. SHIVARAJ D,
                   S/O DYAMAPPA,
                   AGED BOUT 36 YEARS,
                   RESIDING AT WARD NO.7
                   M.V. EXTENSION, 3RD MAIN,
                   KUVEMPUNAGARA,
                   HOSAKOTE TOWN-562 114,
                   BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
                                                                ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. HARISH KUMAR C.,ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1. SMT. MANJULA D L,
                      W/O SHIVARAJ.D
Digitally signed
                      AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
by SHARADA
VANI B                RESIDING AT MARUTHI BADAVANE,
Location: HIGH        SAVALANGA ROAD, NAVULE,
COURT OF              SHIVAMOGGA.
KARNATAKA
                   2. THNVITHA
                      D/O SHIVARAJ.D
                      AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS,
                      RESIDIN AT MARUTHI BADAVANE,
                      SAVALANGA ROAD, NAVULE,
                      SHIVAMOGGA.

                   3. MASTER DAKSHITH
                      D/O SHIVARAJ.D
                      AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS,
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2023:KHC:29529
                                     WP No. 16854 of 2023



  RESIDING AT MARUTHI BADAVANE,
  SAVALANGA ROAD, NAVULE,
  SHIVAMOGGA.

RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS,
REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN MANJULA.D.L.
                                           ...RESPONDENTS

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
ENTIRE RECORDS IN CRL. MIS.NO. 107/2022, ON THE FILE OF
THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, SHIVAMOGGA AND TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
FAMILY COURT, SHIVAMOGGA IN CRL. MIS.NO. 107/2022 ON
24/01/2023 AND TO DISMISS THE PETITION FILED BY THE
RESPONDENTS CRL.MIS.NO. 107/2022 PRINCIPAL JUDGE
FAMILY COURT, SHIVAMOGGA.

    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

Petitioner is the husband and 1st Respondent is the

wife; Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are their children; Petitioner

& Respondent No.1 are an estranged couple. Petitioner has

filed M.C.No.54/2023 seeking a decree for dissolution of

their marriage on certain grounds. Respondent-wife's

Application in I.A.No.1/2022 filed u/s.125(1) of Cr.P.C.,

1973 in Crl.Misc.,No.107/2022 having been favoured,

learned Principal Judge of Family Court at Shivamogga,

vide order dated 24.01.2023 has directed the Petitioner-

NC: 2023:KHC:29529 WP No. 16854 of 2023

husband to pay in all Rs.15,000/- per month as the

maintenance. The same is put in challenge in this writ

jurisdiction.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the

Petitioner and having perused the Petition papers, this

court declines indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, the

marital relationship with the 1st Respondent is not disputed

and the legitimacy of the children is also admitted. In

fact, the two children are being looked after by the

Respondent-wife herself. She has gone back to

Shivamogga and has been residing with her natal family

along with these children. The days are very costly and

Rs.15,000/- is justifiably ordered as maintenance for all

the three collectively. In matters like this, what amount is

claimed as maintenance pales into insignificance since this

is not a Bank & borrower matter; it is a question of life of

a lady and two pretty children.

3. The submission of the learned counsel for the

Petitioner that his client does not have sufficient means to

pay maintenance, is difficult to countenance. It is a duty

NC: 2023:KHC:29529 WP No. 16854 of 2023

in law, in religion and in reason to make payment for the

maintenance of wife & children. However, no material is

produced to show that the Respondent-wife is gainfully

employed and she has any source of income. Even

otherwise, the principal duty is on the shoulders of Man.

4. The above apart, the impugned order is a

product of exercise of statutory discretion; for invoking

writ remedy under Article 226/227 a strong case of

violation of rules of reason & justice has to be made out.

In the instant case, there is not even a whisper

substantiating the said contention. Therefore, all aspects

having been duly considered, this Court opines that the

impugned order does not merit a deeper examination at

the hands of this Court in the jurisdiction constitutionally

vested under Article 227 vide SADAHANA LODH vs.

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. Ltd., (2003) 3 SCC 524.

Added, the objective of granting interim/permanent

alimony is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not

reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the

failure of the marriage, and not as a punishment to the

NC: 2023:KHC:29529 WP No. 16854 of 2023

other spouse. There is no straitjacket formula for fixing

the quantum of maintenance to be awarded, Vide

RANJESH v. NEHA, (2021) 2 SCC 324.

In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition being

devoid of merits is liable to be rejected and accordingly it

is, costs having been made easy.

The Registry shall send a copy of this judgment to

the Respondent-wife through Speed Post immediately.

Sd/-

JUDGE Bsv