[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Mahiboob vs Zakiya on 18 December, 2025
Author: M.G.S.Kamal
Bench: M.G.S.Kamal
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
RPFC No. 200033 of 2025
C/W RPFC No. 200067 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 200033 OF 2025
C/W
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 200067 OF 2025
IN RPFC No. 200033/2025
BETWEEN:
1. ZAKIYA W/O MAHIBOOB ZALAKI,
(ZAKIYA D/O ABDULRAZAK SOUDAGAR),
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: H. H. WORK,
R/O. TAKKE, TQ. AND DIST.VIJAYAPURA - 586101.
2. MOHAMMAD MAHEER S/O MAHIBOOB ZALAKI,
AGE: 04 YEARS, OCC: NIL.
Digitally signed by
RAMESH
MATHAPATI 3. RAHEMAT D/O MAHIBOOB ZALAKI,
Location: HIGH AGE: 1 YEAR 07 MONTHS, OCC: NIL,
COURT OF SINCE THE PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3
KARNATAKA
ARE THE MINORS,
REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN
MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1,
ZAKIYA W/O MAHIBOOB ZALAKI.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
RPFC No. 200033 of 2025
C/W RPFC No. 200067 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
MAHIBOOB S/O MOULALI ZALAKI,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: MESCOM LINEMAN,
R/O. VIVEKAND BADAVANE,
NEAR PARK BIRUR (RURAL),
TQ. AND DIST.CHIKKMANGALURU,
NOW RESIDENT OF WARD NO.35,
ATHANI ROAD, PREETI COLONY,
VIJAYAPURA - 586101.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADVOCATE)
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE
FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.01.2025 PASSED IN
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS NO.560/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE
COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY
COURT VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA BY ALLOWING THE
MAINTENANCE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AND TO
GRANTING THE MAINTENANCE AS CLAIMED BEFORE THE
FAMILY COURT VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA. AND ORDER FOR
COSTS OF THIS REVISION PETITION AND PASS SUCH OTHER
ORDERS DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
IN RPFC NO. 200067/2025
BETWEEN:
MAHIBOOB S/O MOULALI ZALAKI,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: MESCOM LINEMAN,
R/O. VIVEKANAND BADAVANE, NEAR PARK,
BIRUR (RURAL),
TQ. AND DIST. CHIKKAMANGALURU-577101.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI MALIK PASHA MAUZAN, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. LIYAQAT FAREED, ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
RPFC No. 200033 of 2025
C/W RPFC No. 200067 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
1. ZAKIYA W/O MAHEBOOB ZALAKI,
(ZAKIYA D/O ABDULRAZAK SOUDAGAR),
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: H.H. WORK,
R/O. TAKKE, TQ. AND DIST. VIJYAPURA- 586101.
2. MOHAMMED MAHIR S/O MAHEBOOB ZALAKI, AGE:
05YEARS, OCC: NILL.
3. RAHEMAT D/O MAHEBOOB ZALAKI,
AGE: 03 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.
RESPONDENT NO.2 AND3 ARE MINORS,
REP. BY U/G OF THEIR NATURAL MOTHER
PETITIONER NO. 1.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY R1)
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE
FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE JUDGMENT
AND ORDER DATED 15.01.2025 PASSED BY THE I
ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT
VIJAYPUR IN CRL.MISC.NO. 560/2025 OR ISSUE ANY
OTHER DIRECTION IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES
OF THE ABOVE CASE AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
RPFC No. 200033 of 2025
C/W RPFC No. 200067 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
Being aggrieved by the order dated 15.02.2025 passed in
Criminal Misc.No.560/2023 on the file of the I Addl. Principal
Judge, Family Court, Vijayapur, (for short 'the Family Court' by
which the Family Court while allowing the petition filed under
Section 125 Cr.P.C. has directed the respondent-husband to
pay Rs.6,000/- to petitioner No.1 till her lifetime or remarriage
and Rs.2,000/- to petitioner No.1 till he attains the age of
majority and Rs.1,000/- to the petitioner No.3 until her
marriage from the date of disposal of the proceedings under
Domestic Violence Act, petitioners-wife and children are before
this Court in RPFC No.200033/2025 seeking enhancement,
while the respondent-husband is before this Court in RPFC
No.200067/2025 seeking quashing of the order.
2. The marriage between the petitioner No.1-wife and
respondent having solemnized on 19.07.2019 and petitioner
Nos.2 and 3 having born to them is not in dispute. There
appears to have been certain marital discord between the
petitioner No.1 and respondent resulting in parties resorting to
the litigations. The petitioner No.1-wife has also initiated
proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
HC-KAR
Violence Act, 2005, alleging negligence in providing
maintenance. She has also initiated the proceedings under
Section 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance of Rs.10,000/-
each to petitioner Nos.1 to 3.
3. Respondent husband is admittedly working as a
lineman in Mangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd.,
(MESCOM). As per the salary slip for the month of January
2024 the last drawn salary was Rs.66,174/- after deduction the
net payable amount shown therein is Rs.26,131/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Family Court without taking the consideration of the position of
the parties and the income being earned by the respondent-
husband has awarded the maintenance which is meager and
does not meet the requirement. He submits that the petitioner
has no source of income and is completely dependent on the
maintenance provided by the respondent-husband. He
therefore submits that since the salary slip was of the year
2024, which has now substantially enhanced, the enhancement
as sought for be awarded.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
HC-KAR
5. In response, learned counsel for the respondent-
husband submits that though the salary slip of January 2024
indicate the gross salary to be Rs.66,174/-, after deduction he
receives only a sum of Rs.26,131 of which he has to provide
maintenance to the petitioner as well as himself and his age old
mother. Therefore there is no scope or room for any further
enhancement. Hence, seeks for dismissal of the petition filed by
the petitioner No.1-wife. He further submits that the petitioners
have also initiated proceedings under Domestic Violence Act, in
which petitioners have been awarded interim maintenance of
Rs.3,000/- to petitioner No.1 and Rs.2,000/- each to the
children. Therefore, he submits that the respondent cannot be
burdened any more. Hence, seeking for allowing of the petition
filed by the respondent-husband setting aside the order passed
by the Family Court.
6. Heard, perused the records.
7. The relationship between the parties is not in
dispute and the respondent-husband being an employee of
MESCOM earning salary as noted above as of the year 2024 is
also not in dispute. The Family Court taking into consideration
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
HC-KAR
of the matter has awarded Rs.6,000/- to petitioner No.1,
Rs.2,000 to petitioner No.2 and Rs.1,000/- to petitioner No.3
with a rider that the said amount shall be paid only after the
disposal of proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act.
8. It is also not in dispute in the Domestic Violence
Act, the petitioners have been awarded interim maintenance
and which is also being paid the respondent-husband.
Considering the income which is derived by the respondent-
husband and the status to which the parties are accustomed,
this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order
passed by the Family Court be modified by enhancing the
maintenance amount awarded to petitioner No.1 from
Rs.6,000/- to Rs.8,000- maintenance amount awarded to
petitioner No.2 from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.3,500/- and for petitioner
No.3 from Rs.1,000 to Rs.3,500/-. Such enhancement shall be
from the date of this revision petition.
9. Accordingly, the following:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
HC-KAR
ORDER
(a) The petition in RPFC No.200033/2025 filed by the
petitioners is partly allowed.
(b) The petition in RPFC No.200067/2025 filed by the
respondent-husband is dismissed.
(c) The respondent-husband is directed to pay
Rs.8,000/- to petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,500/- each
to petitioner Nos.2 and 3.
(d) It is made clear that since the Domestic Violence
proceedings are stated to be still pending
consideration in which already interim order has
been passed, the Family Court shall take into
consideration the amount be paid and provide
appropriate adjustment/set off against the amount
enhanced herein.
(e) The respondent husband shall pay the entire
amount including the arrears and shall continue to
pay the amount as directed herein above regularly.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7885
HC-KAR
(f) The arrears shall be deposited between within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of
certified copy of the order.
Sd/-
(M.G.S.KAMAL)
JUDGE
MSR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4
CT:PK
