Karnataka High Court

Smt. Geeta W/O. Suraj Bhat vs Suraj S/O. Lalaji Shankar Bhat on 28 June, 2024

Author: M.G.S. Kamal

Bench: M.G.S. Kamal

                                                -1-
                                                        NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849
                                                        RPFC No. 100121 of 2015




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                              DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

                                              BEFORE

                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

                            REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO.100121 OF 2015

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   SMT. GEETA W/O. SURAJ BHAT,
                        AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEWIFE,

                   2.   KUMARI NEHA D/O. SURAJ BHAT,
                        AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,

                        SINCE PETITIONER NO.2 MINOR
                        REP. BY NATURAL GUARDIAN HER MOTHER
                        PETITIONER NO.1


                        BOTH R/O: PACIFIC PARK, SAGAR COLONY,
                        GADAG ROAD, HUBBALLI,
                        DIST: DHARWAD.
                                                                   ...PETITIONERS
Digitally signed
by V N BADIGER     (BY SRI S. C. JAINAR, ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka          AND:

                   SURAJ S/O. LALAJI SHANKAR BHAT,
                   AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE MECHANIC,
                   R/O: M/S. TE CONNECTIVITY INDIA PVT. LTD,
                   GUT NO. 1122.1129.1295. 1296
                   SHIRWAL VILLAGE, TQ: KHANDALA,
                   DIST: SATARA, STATE: MAHARASHTRA.
                                                                  ...RESPONDENT
                   (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
                             -2-
                                  NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849
                                  RPFC No. 100121 of 2015




     THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY
COURTS ACT,1984, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS RPFC AND MODIFY
THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2015 PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL
JUDGE, FAMILY COURT HUBBALLI IN CRIMINAL MISC NO.42/2014 IN
THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC.,

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


                          ORDER

This petition is by the wife and daughter of the

respondent herein seeking enhancement of the

maintenance amount which was granted in Criminal

Miscellaneous No.42/2014 by order dated 31.07.2015 on

the file of Principal Judge Family Court, Hubballi. The

above petition was filed by the petitioners herein under

Section 125 of Cr.P.C., seeking Rs.10,000/- each towards

their maintenance.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the marriage

of petitioner No.1 was solemnized with respondent herein

on 29.11.1998. That on account of bad vices to which the

respondent was addicted to including his alleged illicit

relationship the petitioner No.1 could not leave with the

NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849

respondent. That the petitioner No.1 studied only upto 8th

standard and has no means of earning her livelihood. The

respondent herein on the other hand was working at M/s.

TE Connectivity India Private Limited and was receiving

handsome salary. The respondent had driven the

petitioner No.1 out of their house and as such she is

residing with her parents. The father of the petitioner No.1

is retired employee. The respondent did even care to pay

and maintain the petitioner No.2 who is his daughter. The

petitioner No.2 was pursuing her education in PUC.

3. That the notice was issued to the respondent

which was replied by respondent denying the allegations.

4. Respondent filed statement of objection

denying the above averments and has contended that

petitioner No.1 was earning Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/- per

month by doing domestic works and that he was earning

only Rs.15,000/- per month and after all the deductions he

was receiving only Rs.11,000/-. That he has aged mother

and he had to take care of his widowed sister. Thus, he

sought for dismissal of the petition.

NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849

5. The Family Court on appreciation of pleadings

and evidence concluded that the respondent had

deliberately without any reason neglected to maintain the

petitioners and the petitioners were thus entitled for

maintenance. Taking into consideration of the salary slip of

the respondent which was produced as per Ex.P.32, the

Family Court was found that the respondent was earning

Rs.29,416/- and after deduction was receiving Rs.14,851/,

directed the respondent to pay Rs.4,000/- to the petitioner

No.1 and Rs.2,000/- to the petitioner No.2 as

maintenance.

6. The respondent has not challenged the order

passed by the Family Court. However, the petitioners are

before this Court seeking enhancement of their

maintenance.

7. It appears during the pendency of the

proceedings, marriage of the petitioner No.2 has been

conducted and the entire marriage expenses have been

incurred and borne by the petitioner No.1. Taking note of

the said submission, this Court by its order dated

NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849

25.08.2022 passed on the application in I.A. No.1/2019

filed by the petitioners directed the respondent to pay the

marriage expenses of the petitioner No.2 and has held

that the respondent herein was liable to pay Rs.6,02,980/-

towards the marriage expenses. That since admittedly the

respondent had paid Rs.75,000/-, this Court has directed

him to pay remaining Rs.5,27,980/-.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

respondent has not paid the said amount.

9. Though the notice has been served and the

matter is pending since from 2015 the respondent has not

appeared in this matter. However, it is submitted that the

maintenance amount is directly deducted and being paid

by the employer of the respondent before the Family

Court.

10. This Court by order dated 06.06.2024 had

directed the Family Court to obtain salary details of

respondent-husband from its employer. Pursuant thereof,

the Family Court, Hubballi has forward a communication to

the Registry of this Court along with pay slip of the

NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849

respondent for the month of April-2024 issued by the M/s.

TE Connectivity India Private Limited. In that the gross

salary of respondent is shown as Rs.68,587/- and after

deductions his net salary for the month is shown as

Rs.44,905/-.

11. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioners

submits that the amount of maintenance awarded by the

Family Court is too meager and not sufficient to maintain

herself and the same is required enhancement.

12. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon

the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury Vs. Rita Dey

Chowdhury Nee Nandy reported in AIR 2017 (SC)

2383. Relying upon paragraph No.16 of the said

judgment, learned counsel submits that the maintenance

is to be enhanced and the respondent be directed to pay

25% of the gross salary towards the maintenance.

13. Heard. Perused the records.

14. When the Family Court passed its order dated

31.07.2015 the gross salary which was being drawn by the

NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849

respondent was Rs.29,416/-. Taking into consideration of

net salary, the Family Court had awarded Rs.4,000/-

payable to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.2,000/- payable to

the petitioner No.2. Now, in view of the letter received by

the Family Court with the latest pay-slip of the respondent

for the month of April-2024, wherein the gross salary of

the respondent is shown as Rs.68,587/- and net salary is

shown as Rs.44,905/- and also in view of the marriage of

the petitioner No.2 having been solemnized, the

respondent would be liable to pay maintenance only to the

petitioner No.1.

15. Considering the material evidence on record, it

is just and proper that the respondent be directed to pay a

sum of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner No.1 instead of

Rs.4,000/-. That apart, respondent shall pay the marriage

expenses of Rs.5,27,980/- as already directed by this

Court vide order dated 25.08.2022.

NC: 2024:KHC-D:8849

16. Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

(a) Revision Petition is allowed in part.

(b) Petitioner is entitled for enhanced maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- instead of Rs.4,000/- per month from the date of this order.

              (c)       Respondent      shall     also    pay
       Rs.5,27,980/-        as   per    the     order    dated
       25.08.2022 passed by this Court.