Karnataka High Court
Smt.Yallamma @ Geethamma vs Sri.Ningappa on 5 February, 2024
Author: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
RPFC No. 26 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
REV.PETITION FAMILY COURT NO.26 OF 2014
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. YALLAMMA @ GEETHAMMA
W/O NINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
HOUSE WIFE
R/AT C/O IGURU KENCHAPPA
MAYAKONDA VILLAGE
DAVANAGERE TQ & DISTRICT - 577 002.
2. SRI. DHARSHAN
S/O NINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
3. SRI. VIKAS
S/O NINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS,
Digitally signed by JAI
JYOTHI J
Location: HIGH COURT
PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS
OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THEIR NEXT FRIEND
NATURAL GUARDIAN THEIR MOTHER PETITONER
NO.2 SMT. YALLAMMA
@ GEETHAMMA
R/AT C/O IGURU KENCHAPPA
MAYAKONDA VILLAGE,
DAVANAGERE TQ & DISTRICT - 577 002.
...PETITIONERS
(BY KUM. GOWTHAMI, AMICUS CURIAE, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
RPFC No. 26 of 2014
AND:
1. SRI. NINGAPPA
S/O LATE KODLENNARA MALLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT VIDHYANAGAR,
DHEVARAHALLI (NEW VILLAGE),
CHANNAGIRI TQ,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 002.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M VISHWAJITH RAI, ADVOCATE)
THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY
COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.1.2014 PASSED
IN CRL. MISC. NO. 41/ 2012 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE,
FAMILY COURT, DAVANGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This revision petition is filed by the wife and
children challenging the order dated 13.01.2014 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.41/2012 by the Judge, Family Court,
Davanagere, for seeking enhancement of maintenance
amount.
2. The relationship between petitioner No.1 and
respondent as wife and husband is not disputed. On
certain allegations that the respondent has ill-treated
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
petitioner No.1-wife by consuming alcohol and thus,
petitioner No.1 along with children were forced to live
separately. Therefore, for maintenance, the petitioners
have filed the petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., and
the Family Court has granted maintenance amount of
Rs.500/- per month to petitioner No.1-wife and Rs.200/-
per month each to petitioner Nos.2 and 3-children
respectively. Being inadequate of maintenance amount,
the present petition is filed by the wife and children.
3. Petitioner No.1 being woman and petitioner
Nos.2 and 3 being minor sons are entitled for free legal aid
as per Section 13 of the Legal Services Authority Act.
Hence, Kum.Gowthami, learned counsel is appointed as
Amicus Curiae on behalf of petitioners being wife and
children.
4. Learned Amicus Curiae submitted that the
quantum of maintenance amount granted by the Family
Court is very meagre and even it is not sufficient to have a
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
cup of tea daily. Therefore, prays for enhancement of
maintenance amount.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondent justified the order of maintenance granted by
the Family Court.
6. When it is admitted that the petitioners are wife
and children of the respondent. It is duty bound and
obligation on the part of the respondent to maintain his
wife and children. The Family Court has granted very
meagre amount of maintenance. Even the said
maintenance amount is not sufficient to have a cup of tea
everyday. The said insufficient maintenance is granted by
the Family Court without application of mind. Ex.P.2 -Tax
assessment register extract proves that the father of the
respondent is the owner of house. It is admitted that the
respondent is the only son to his parents. The respondent
is the owner of five acres of land and by agricultural
income, the respondent is receiving income. Ex.P.3 and
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
Ex.P.4 are RTC extract, which is standing in the name of
maternal aunt of the respondent. It is stated that the
agricultural lands are still the joint family property and if
the parents and respondent are given share, then the
respondent would also get share in the said property.
7. Therefore, considering all these evidence on
record and appreciating the evidence on all its
preponderance of probability, the petitioners are entitled
for enhancement of maintenance amount. Even by doing
labour work, the respondent has to maintain his wife and
children. In this regard, I place reliance on the judgments
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Rajnesh Vs.
Neha1 and Chaturbhuj Vs. Sita Bai2. When it is proved
that the respondent is also having agricultural income, but
at the same time, wife and children are not having any
income and they are destituted, therefore, they are
entitled for minimum adequate maintenance.
AIR 2021 SC 569
(2008) 2 SCC 316
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
8. Therefore, it is just and proper to award
maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- to petitioner No.1-wife
by the respondent every month without fail till her lifetime
or she re-marries and Rs.2,000/- per month to each
petitioner Nos.2 and 3 from the date of petition till they
attain the age of majority. Therefore, the petition filed by
the petitioners is liable to be allowed in part.
9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the
following
ORDER
i. The petition is allowed in part.
ii. The impugned order dated 13.01.2014 passed in
Crl.Misc.No.41/2012 by the Judge, Family Court,
Davanagere, is modified.
iii. Petitioner No.1-wife is entitled to enhanced
maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- p.m., to be
payable by the respondent-husband without fail till
her lifetime or she re-marries and Rs.2,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC:4908
p.m., to each petitioner Nos.2 and 3 from the date
of petition till they attain the age of majority.
iv. No order as to costs.
v. The learned Amicus Curiae assisted the Court in
well manner, so that the Court is able to come to
a right conclusion and services rendered by her
are placed on record. Therefore, the Secretary,
High Court Legal Services Committee is directed
to pay a professional fee to the learned Amicus
Curiae - Kum.Gowthami as per rules.
vi. Registry is directed to transmit the TCR along with
copy of this order to the concerned Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PB
