Karnataka High Court
Ambuja vs Srinivas on 6 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
MFA No. 200564 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200564 OF 2022 (MC-DIS)
BETWEEN:
AMBUJA
W/O SRINIVAS HOVANOOR,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC. PRINCIPAL,
HINDI B.ED COLLEGE,
R/O PLOT NO.34,
ASHIRWAD VISHWARADYA COLONY,
KAILASH NAGAR, KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT.HEMA L. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
SRINIVAS
by VARSHA N S/O KRISHNA HOVANOOR,
RASALKAR
Location: HIGH
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC. ASST. TEACHER,
COURT OF GAUTAM WELFARE SOCIETY,
KARNATAKA
R/O C/O P.B. JOSHI PLOT NO.13,
NEW RAGHAVENDRA COLONY,
BRAHMPUR, KALABURAGI - 585 101.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.R.V.NADAGOUDA, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY
COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN
M.C.NO.155/2018 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED DISTRICT JUDGE,
FAMILY COURT AT KALABURAGI AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL
BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
18.05.2020.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
MFA No. 200564 of 2022
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY
ASHOK S. KINAGI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section 19 (1) of the Family
Courts Act, 1984, challenging the portion of the judgment
dated 18.05.2020 passed in MC No.155/2018 by the
District Judge, Family Court, Kalaburagi.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court.
The appellant is the respondent and respondent is the
petitioner before the Family Court.
3. The brief facts for filing of this appeal are that,
the marriage of petitioner with respondent was solemnized
on 20.04.2008 at Dandeli as per the customs prevailing in
their community. Out of the wedlock a daughter was born
on 06.11.2010. The respondent resided happily with the
petitioner only for few months. Thereafter, the respondent
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
started to quarrel with the petitioner without any just,
valid and genuine reasons. The petitioner somehow
managed and accommodate adjust, hoping that one day
or other, the respondent would mend her ways, but the
respondent did not change her attitude. The petitioner
being fed up with the attitude of the respondent filed case
in MC No.30/2015 under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act.
The said petition came to be allowed vide judgment dated
23.03.2007 directing the respondent to join the company
of petitioner within two months. Pursuant to the judgment
passed in the aforesaid case, the petitioner requested the
respondent to join the company of the petitioner but the
respondent did not come forward to join the company of
petitioner. The petitioner issued a legal notice dated
12.04.2018, inspite of service of notice, the respondent
did not join the company of petitioner. Hence, the
petitioner filed the petition seeking for decree of divorce.
4. The respondent filed the written statement
denying the averments made in the petition and also
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
contended that the petition may be allowed subject to
payment of permanent alimony and prayed to dispose of
the petition.
5. The Family Court on the basis of pleadings of
the parties framed the following points for its
consideration:
i. Whether petitioner proves that respondent has
illtreated him mentally and physically and it is
not possible for the petitioner to lead life with
respondent?
ii. Whether the respondent is entitled to
permanent alimony of Rs.30,00,000/- from the
petitioner?
iii. What order?
6. The petitioner in support of his case, got
himself examined as PW.1 and examined one witness as
PW.2 and got marked documents Exs.P1 to P3.
Respondent got examined herself as RW.1 and marked 3
documents as Ex.R1 to R3. The Family Court after
recording the evidence, hearing learned counsel for the
parties and on assessment of oral and documentary
evidence, answered point No.1 in the affirmative and point
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
No.2 partly in the affirmative and point No.3 as per the
final order and consequently, allowed the petition filed by
the petitioner and marriage solemnized between the
petitioner and the respondent on 20.04.2008 at Dandeli
was dissolved by a decree of divorce and respondent is
entitled to permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- for her
and her daughter future life and the petitioner is also
directed to pay the permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/-
to the respondent within three months from the date of
the order, failing which the respondent is at liberty to
recover the said amount from the petitioner by taking
necessary legal steps. The respondent being aggrieved by
the portion of the judgment and decree passed in MC
No.155/2018 regarding granting of permanent alimony of
Rs.10,00,000/- has filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal for
enhancement of permanent alimony.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-
respondent and the learned counsel for the respondent-
petitioner.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
8. Learned counsel for the appellant - respondent
submits the petitioner is working as teacher in the school
and gets monthly salary of Rs.51,046/-. Hence she
submits that the petitioner has got the capacity to pay the
permanent alimony hence, she prays to enhance the
permanent alimony.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is working in a private aided
school as Assistant Teacher and getting a meager salary
and is not having financial capacity to pay the permanent
alimony as demanded by the respondent.
10. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The points
that arise for our consideration are:
i. Whether the respondent has made out a
ground for enhancement of permanent
alimony?
ii. What order?
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
11. It is not in dispute that the marriage of
petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 20.04.2008
at Dandeli as per the customs prevailing in their
community. The relationship of the petitioner with the
respondent was not cordial. However, respondent has
contended in the written statement that the respondent
has no objection to grant decree of divorce and further
stated that the petitioner may be directed to pay
permanent alimony. Though the respondent has produced
the letter issued by the President, Karnataka Pradesh
Sahitya Sammelan Kendra, Kalaburagi as per Ex.R3,
wherein it discloses that the petitioner has got gross salary
of Rs.51,046/- in the month of January-2020 and he is
having another 13 years of service and admittedly, the
respondent has also to maintain herself and her daughter
aged about 14 years. The Family Court has granted
permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent
and also to her daughter. The permanent alimony granted
by the Family Court is meager, hence, we are of the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
considered view that the respondent and her daughter are
entitled for permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- in
addition to what has been awarded by the Family Court.
12. In view of the above discussion, we answer
point No.1 in affirmative.
13. Insofar as point No.2 is concerned, we proceed
to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The judgment and decree dated 18.05.2020
passed in MC No.155/2018 by the District Judge,
Family Court, Kalaburagi is modified.
iii. The respondent is entitled to total permanent
alimony of Rs.20,00,000/- and petitioner is
directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Lakhs only) within a period of three
months from the date of receipt of copy of this
order, failing which the respondent is at liberty to
recover the said amount from the petitioner by
taking legal steps. However, liberty is also
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3671-DB
reserved in favour of daughter to seek
maintenance for her education and marriage
expenses against the petitioner.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
VNR
CT;BN
