Karnataka High Court
Smt Ramadevi vs Sri K R Nandakumar on 15 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
RPFC No. 86 of 2023
C/W RPFC No. 20 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 86 OF 2023
C/W
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 20 OF 2023
IN RPFC No. 86/2023
BETWEEN:
SMT. RAMADEVI
W/O V. NANDAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39/2,
3RD CROSS,
BHAGATH SINGH ROAD,
MUTHYALPETE, MULBAGAL,
Digitally KOLAR DISTRICT 563 131
signed by ...PETITIONER
SUNITHA K S
(BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADVOCATE)
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF AND:
KARNATAKA
SRI. K.R. NANDAKUMAR
S/O RAMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
MARKETING DIVISION (BEL),
RESIDING AT NO 569,
BEL COLONY, OPP. NAGALAND BUS STAND,
JALAHALLI BANGALORE.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
RPFC No. 86 of 2023
C/W RPFC No. 20 of 2023
NOW RESIDING AT
KONDARAJANAHALLI VILLAGE,
KOLAR TALUK 563 101
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. SUMANGALA A SWAMY, ADVOCATE)
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE
FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 14.12.2022 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.32/2016 ON THE
FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, KOLAR,
DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C.
FOR MAINTENANCE.
IN RPFC NO. 20/2023
BETWEEN:
SRI. K.R. NANDAKUMAR
S/O RAMAPPA M.,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/O NO. 569 BEL NORTH COLONY,
NAGALAND CIRCLE,
JALAHALLI POST,
BANGALORE 560 013
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUMANGALA A SWAMY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. RAMADEVI K.S.,
W/O NANDAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/O NO. 3219/1, 3RD CROSS,
BHAGATH SINGH ROAD,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
RPFC No. 86 of 2023
C/W RPFC No. 20 of 2023
MYTHALA PETE,
MULBAGAL TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH K., ADVOCATE)
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE
FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED
14.12.2022 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.No.32/2016 ON THE FILE
OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, KOLAR,
DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF
Cr.P.C. FOR MAINTENANCE.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
COMMON ORAL ORDER
These revision petitions are filed under Section 19(4)
of the Family Court's Act. The Husband and wife were
aggrieved by the judgment dated 14.12.2022, passed in
Crl.Misc.No.32/2016, by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Kolar.
2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this
revision petitions are as follows:
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
The petitioner in RPFC No.86/2023 is a wife, and
respondent is the husband. The petitioner and respondent
are legally wedded wife and husband. Their marriage was
solemnized on 13.10.2014 as per the customs prevailing
in their community. After marriage, they lived together as
husband and wife. The respondent - husband used to
come home late night, addicted to smoking. When the
petitioner - wife questioned him, he started abusing and
assaulting her. The respondent - husband dropped the
petitioner at her parent's house, saying that he had a
house in Bengaluru. After cleaning the house, he will take
her back to the said house. She stayed in her parent's
house for 3 months. The respondent - husband never
visited the parental house of the petitioner. Finally, her
parents requested him to take back the petitioner's wife.
The respondent - husband assaulted the petitioner - wife
and started abusing her parents alleging that her parents
had not brought up her properly. The petitioner left the
matrimonial home. The respondent drove the petitioner
out of the house. The petitioner - wife has no source of
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
income to maintain herself, and the respondent has driven
her. The respondent - husband has not provided any
maintenance and refused to maintain her. The petitioner -
wife lodged a criminal case against the respondent -
husband in FIR No.404/2015 for the offences punishable
under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3
and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner filed a
petition under (Section 125 of Cr.P.C.) Section 144 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for
maintenance.
3. The respondent - husband filed objections
admitting marriage with the petitioner and relationship.
The respondent denied that the petitioner's parents had
borne the marriage expenses. It is contended that the
petitioner-wife lodged a false complaint on 05.09.2015
against the respondent -husband and his family members.
It is contended that the petitioner-wife deserted him after
1 1/2 years. It is contended that the respondent - husband
was sent to distant relative's house, where he was brought
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
up. His sisters constantly faced abuse at the hands of the
father's woman. Due to the said reason the respondent-
husband has distanced himself from his rich father. It is
contended that he is working as a technician - B in wage
group-V in M/s.Bharat Electronics Limited is getting a
meagre salary and hence denied the entire allegation
made in the petition and prays to dismiss the petition.
4. The petitioner - wife to prove her claim petition,
examined herself as PW1 and two witnesses as PW2 and
PW3, and marked 8 documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P8.
Respondent - Husband examined himself as RW1 and
marked 16 documents as Ex.R1 to Ex.R16. The trial court
after recording the evidence considering the material
placed on records dismissed the petition, and it is
observed that there is no modification to the order dated
10.01.2017 regarding interim maintenance. The petitioner
- wife can recover interim maintenance as per the order till
the date of disposal of the case. Further, the Respondent -
Husband was directed to pay the litigation expenses of
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner - wife. Further the
Respondent - Husband was directed to deposit the entire
arrears of interim maintenance along with the litigation
expenses within 60 days from the date of the order. The
petitioner - wife aggrieved by the order dated 14.12.2022
passed in Crl.Misc.No.32/2016 dismissing the petition,
filed Revision Petition in RPFC No.86/2023. The Husband
aggrieved by the portion of the order passed in the
aforesaid order regarding directing the Respondent -
Husband to pay the interim maintenance as per the order
dated 10.01.2017, filed the revision petition in RPFC
No.20/2023.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner -
wife and learned counsel for the respondent - husband.
Learned counsel for the wife submits that the court below
committed an error in dismissing the petition on the
ground that the petitioner - wife is MCA graduate she
could work and earn and she is not dependent on him. He
submits that the petitioner - wife is suffering from illness,
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
and she was working in A.B.B.S college and getting a
handsome salary. It is submitted that she is suffering from
depression and is taking treatment and is unable to work.
The trial court committed an error in dismissing the
petition. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the
Revision petition filed by Petitioner - wife and to dismiss
the Revision Petition filed by the Respondent - Husband.
6. Learned counsel for the Respondent - Husband
submits that the petitioner is capable of maintaining
herself, is well educated, and is getting a handsome
salary. The family court was justified in dismissing the
petition. He submits that while dismissing the petition, the
family court committed an error in directing petitioner -
wife to recover the interim maintenance from the
Respondent - Husband. Hence, the said order is arbitrary
and aronius. Hence, on these grounds he prays to dismiss
the Revision Petition filed by the wife and to allow the
revision petition filed by the husband.
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
7. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. There is
no dispute regarding to the relationship between the
petitioner and respondent as husband and wife and the
matrimonial relationship between the petitioner - wife and
respondent - husband is not cordial. The petitioner - wife
is residing separately. The petitioner - wife is an MCA
graduate, and she is working at A.B.B.S College. To
demonstrate that the petitioner - wife is working in
A.B.B.S college the respondent produced the photographs
marked as Ex.R2 to Ex.R7. Though the said photographs
were secured on the petitioner's facebook account are
secondary electronic documents. The respondent has not
submitted the certificate as required under Section 65 B of
the Evidence Act. The Petitioner - wife has admitted that,
prior to her marital dispute, she graduated with an MCA
Degree. The petitioner - wife is an MCA graduate and
capable of securing the jobs. From the Perusal of 125 of
Cr.P.C the petitioner - wife is liable to prove that the
petitioner - wife has no capacity to maintain herself and
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
husband has neglected her. Admittedly, in the instant
case, the petitioner has failed to establish that she is
unable to maintain herself. The Family Court, considering
the degree passed by the petitioner - wife and she is
capable of maintaining herself, dismissed the petition.
8. The petitioner during the pendency of
Crl.Misc.No.32/2016, filed the application for interim
maintenance and the said application was allowed vide
order dated 10.01.2017 and directed the respondent -
husband to pay the interim maintenance from the date of
order till the disposal of the case. The order dated
10.01.2017 has attended the finality. The Respondent -
Husband did not challenge the order dated 10.01.2017
and did not comply with the order dated 10.01.2017. The
family court was justified in directing the Petitioner - wife
to recover the interim maintenance as per the order dated
10.01.2017. I do not find any error in the impugned order.
According I proceed to pass the following order.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46423
ORDER
Revision Petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S.KINAGI)
JUDGE
SKS,RCK
