Karnataka High Court

Sri Deepa Darshan H P vs Smt Shruthi H K on 27 February, 2024

                                        -1-
                                                      NC: 2024:KHC:8063
                                                   WP No. 1080 of 2024
                                              C/W WP No. 22185 of 2022




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                   DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                     BEFORE
                 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 1080 OF 2024 (GM-FC)
                                       C/W
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 22185 OF 2022(GM-FC)


            IN WP. NO.1080 / 2024

            BETWEEN:

                  DEEPA DARSHAN H P
                  S/O PUTTASWAMY H.D
                  AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
                  R/AT NO. 527/A, 3rd FLOOR,
                  I T I LAYOUT, NAYANDA LAYOUT,
                  BANGALORE 560039
                                                          ...PETITIONER
            (BY SRI. H B RUDRESH.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by   AND:
SUVARNA T
Location:
HIGH        1.    SMT SHRUTHI H K
COURT OF          D/O KRISHNAPPA C
KARNATAKA         W/O DEEPA DARSHAN H P
                  AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                  PRESENTLY WORKING AS
                  B M T C CONDUCTOR,
                  BADGE NO. 13123, DEPO -16
                  AT DEEPANJALINAGARA
                  MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE.
                            -2-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC:8063
                                      WP No. 1080 of 2024
                                 C/W WP No. 22185 of 2022



     ALSO AT
     NO. 61 SONNAPPA LAYOUT,
     WATER TANK ROAD,
     CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI HEBBAL
     R T NAGAR (P O)
     BANGALORE 560032

     ALSO R./AT
     HEMMANAHLLI VILLAGE AND POST,
     ATHAGANUR HOBLI,
     MADDUR TALUK,MANDYA DIST

2.   SRI. UMESH
     S/O KENDAIAH,
     WORKING AS BMTC DRIVER
     AT BANGALORE, DEPO NO. 17
     PERMANENTLY R/AT
     GEJJALAGERE VILLAGE,
     MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT
                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KUMARA B.,ADVOCATE FOR R1)

    THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE ORDER
PASSED ON I.A.NO.IV IN M.C.NO.4977/2018 DTD 08.09.2023
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I-ADDL FAMILY COURT AT
BANGALORE, VIDE ANNEXURE-A .

IN W.P. NO. 22185 / 2022

BETWEEN:

     SRI DEEPA DARSHAN H P
     S/O PUTTASWAMY H B
     R/AT NO. 527/A,
     3rD FLOOR, ITI LAYOUT,
     NAYANDAHALLI, MYSORE ROAD,
     BANGALORE 560 039
                                             ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. H B RUDRESH.,ADVOCATE)
                            -3-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC:8063
                                      WP No. 1080 of 2024
                                 C/W WP No. 22185 of 2022




AND:

1.   SMT SHRUTHI H K
     D/O KRISHNAPPA C
     W/O DEEPADARSHAN H P
     WORKING BMTC CONDUCTOR
     BADGE NO. 13123, DEPO 16
     AT DEEPANJALINAGARA
     MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560039

     ALSO AVAILABLE AT
     NO.61, SONNAPPA LAYOUT,
     WATER TANK ROAD,
     CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI,
     HEBBAL, RT NAGAR (POST),
     BANGALORE 560 032

     ALSO AVAILABLE AT
     HEMMANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
     ATHAGURU HOBLI, M MADDUR,
     MANDYA DISTRICT - 571428

     ALSO AVAILABLE AT
     C/O PAPANNA
     LAKSHMI NILAYA
     NO.90 1/8,
     HARSHA LAYOUT,
     KRISHNAPPA COMPOUND,
     14th CROSS, KENGERI
     BANGALORE 560 060

2.   SRI. UMESH
     S/O KENDAIAH
     WORKING AS BMTC DRIVER
     AT BENGALURU
     DEPO NO. 17 BADGE NO.

     PERMANENTLY R/AT GEJJALGERE VILLAGE,
     MADDUR TALUK - 571428
                             -4-
                                              NC: 2024:KHC:8063
                                       WP No. 1080 of 2024
                                  C/W WP No. 22185 of 2022



      MANDYA DISTRICT
                                               ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. KUMARA B.,ADVOCATE FOR R1;
    R2 - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)


    THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
PASSED ON I.A. IN M.C.NO. 4977/2018 DTD. 8.09.2022
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. PRL.JUDGE FAMILY
COURT AT BANGALORE VIDE ANNX-A.

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

                           ORDER

The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the

order passed in M.C.No.4977/2018 dated 08.09.2023.

The respondent-herein who is the wife has filed

MC.No.5193/2017 seeking maintenance. In that she has

filed an application for interim maintenance stating that

the marriage was performed on 19.05.2014 and there are

no children out of the wedlock. The husband was not

taking care of her, right from 2017, they have been living

separately. She is living at the mercy of her sister. Her

parents are living in native place at maddur taluk. She is

working as conductor in BMTC. According to her, she has

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

to take care of herself and also her parents, they are

depending upon her salary.

2. The husband has filed OP seeking divorce on the

ground of cruelty and he has not come before the court

nor adduced any evidence. The wife has spent more than

Rs.60,000/- for the legal assistance and according to her,

the petitioner-husband is a contractor and he is providing

manpower to the garment factory, he is getting income

morethan Rs.1,00,000/- with extra commission. Hence

she sought for an amount of Rs.25,000/- as maintenance.

The same was opposed by the husband by filing

objections. It is stated that earlier when I.A. is filed

seeking legal expenses when an order is passed

questioning that he has come before this court by filing

W.P.No.22185/2022 and this court had granted stay of all

further proceedings pursuant to the order passed in I.A. in

MC.No.4977/2018 dated 08.09.2023. It is the case of the

petitioner that wife is working in BMTC as a conductor and

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

earning an amount of Rs.27,266/- per month and whereas

the petitioner is un-employed and not working anywhere,

the question of giving maintenance will not arise . Before

the court below, both of them have filed a statement of

Assets and Liabilities wherein the husband is shown that

he is earning an amount of Rs.25,000/- per month, living

in a rented house and paying an amount of Rs.75,000/-

towards life insurance. According to the wife, she is

earning an amount of Rs.20,162/- as on the date of the

petition. The court below has granted maintenance of an

amount of Rs.25,000/- per month.

3. On perusal of the assets and liabilities statement,

the husband has mentioned that he is doing tailoring work

and denied income as stated by the respondent. The

Court observed that the wife along with her application

has filed an account payee cheque issued by Shree

Creations company for Rs.2,13,744/- dated 19.09.2019,

in support of her contention that the husband is having

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

sufficient income to maintain her. Though the wife is

getting an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month and when

compared to the status of the husband and when

compared with the salary received by the wife, it is quite

reasonable to demand maintenance from the husband and

it is also quite reasonable and accordingly granted the

amount.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-

husband submits that though it is stated that he is earning

an amount of Rs.25,000/-, about Rs.11,000/- is pending

towards the maintenance and other expenditure and also

has to look after old age parents who are dependent on

him. It is submitted that when the respondent-wife is self

sufficient and working as a conductor in BMTC and also

have a settled income, the court below ought not to have

granted the maintenance. He has relied on the order

passed by the Delhi High Court in case of Vijaykumar -

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

Vs- Harshalatha Agarwal1 and relying on said

Judgment, the learned counsel submits that when the wife

herself is having sufficient income, husband need not give

maintenance to wife. Learned counsel further submits

that the document which is relied on by the court below is

produced by the wife and it is one time work done by the

husband and basing on that, the court cannot come to the

conclusion that his income is a regular income every

month. It is submitted that the court below without any

basis had granted maintenance to the wife.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife

submits that the even if the wife is earning, still the

husband is liable to pay the maintenance to her. He had

relied on the Judgment of Apex Court in case of Dhani

Ram -Vs- Master Ram De2 and also Judgment of the

in CM(M)539/2008 dated 10.09.2008

AIR 1995 ALL 320

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

Apex Court in the Case of Rajaneesh -Vs- Neha3 and the

Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of

Umamaheshwar Mahabaleshwar Hegde -Vs-

Sharada4 submits that the husband is bound to maintain

his wife. It is submitted that statement that is filed before

the Court is by suppressing several material facts and he

has not filed the document to show that he has income

from the contract works he is doing. It is submitted that

the husband has already contracted a second marriage, in

that regard, the charge sheet is filed. He further submits

that befitting status of husband, wife is also entitled to live

and husband is liable to pay maintenance to wife.

6. Having heard the learned counsel on either side,

perused the entire material on record. In this case, there

is no dispute about the fact that the wife is earning by

working as a conductor in BMTC. This court has perused

(2021) 2 SCC 324

2002(3) KCCR 1763 (DB)

- 10 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

the affidavit filed, it is stated that she is living at the

mercy of her sister and her parents are dependant upon

her. She has stated that husband is earning an amount of

Rs.1,00,000/- and filed one document as evidence.

Husband has filed the statement of accounts, wherein

according to him he is earning an amount of Rs.25,000/-

per month and also he has to take care of his parents.

The court below only basing on the cheque issued by

Shree Creations for an amount of Rs.2,13,744/- dated

19.09.2019 has granted the maintenance at Rs.20,000/-

per month. The court below has failed to appreciate

whether the said income is regular income of the husband

or not and if this particular aspect when he is not stated in

the statement of accounts, the court below should have

taken appropriate steps against the husband for not

disclosing the same by filing an affidavit before the court.

Without doing any of these exercise, the court below has

simply granted an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month as

maintenance. For giving a finding that the wife is entitled

- 11 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

for interim maintenance befitting the status of husband, in

the considered opinion of this court, there is no material

before the court. According to him, if the case of husband

is taken into consideration, he is earning an amount of

Rs.25,000/- and she is earning an amount of Rs.20,000/-.

There is no dispute about the fact that husband is bound

to maintain the wife. But in a case where the wife is

financially independent when she has her own source of

income, without any valid reasons, just like that she

cannot seek interim maintenance. This application is filed

under Section 24 of Hindu marriage Act which reads as

follows:

24. Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.-

Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the court to be reasonable:

- 12 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

Provided that the application for the payment of the expenses of the proceeding and such monthly sum during the proceeding, shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the wife or the husband, as the case may be.

7. As far as the litigation expenses are concerned,

when the court below has granted, the same is questioned

before this court by filing a writ petition and the same is

stayed by this court. In this case, as per the statement of

accounts, salaries of the wife and husband is Rs.20,000/-

and 25,000/- respectively. According to wife, she has to

maintain her parents and according to husband, he also

has to maintain his parents. The amount that the wife is

earning is not sufficient to maintain herself and coming to

the husband income, as per the statement of accounts

there is nothing to show that he has income of an amount

of Rs.2,13,744/-. Then the wife has filed some document

for an amount of Rs.2,13,744/-. In such a situation the

court below ought not to have allowed this petition and

ought to have conducted a further enquiry into the same,

- 13 -

NC: 2024:KHC:8063

why the petitioner has filed the statement without

disclosing the true facts.

8. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed off in the

following manner:

ORDER

i) The order passed by the I Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru dated 08.09.2023 is set aside and the court below shall consider statement of assets and liability filed before the court and the document produced by the wife showing that there is a account payee cheque for an amount of Rs.2,13,744/- which was not disclosed by the petitioner. Once the court comes to the conclusion that his earning do not tally as per the details mentioned in the statement of accounts, then court shall decide the maintenance basing on the result of the same.