Karnataka High Court

Smt. Chandrakala W/O Devanna Karli vs Devanna Y Karli on 5 March, 2025

                                                     -1-
                                                                NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289
                                                          RPFC No. 100078 of 2022
                                                      C/W RPFC No. 100105 of 2022



                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
                               DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
                                                BEFORE
                                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                             REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100078 OF 2022 (-)
                                                     C/W
                              REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100105 OF 2022


                      IN RPFC NO.100078 OF 2022 (-)
                      BETWEEN:
                      SMT. CHANDRAKALA W/O. DEVANNA KARLI,
                      AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
                      R/O. PLOT NO.9, BASAVA LAYOUT,
                      NAVANAGAR, NEAR SAI MANDIR, HUBBALLI.
                                                                       ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. ROSHAN SAHEB CHABBI, ADVOCATE)
                      AND:
                      DEVANNA Y. KARLI,
                      AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. SERVANT,
                      R/O. OFFICE ADDRESS:
                      TECHNICAL ASSISTANT,
                      GOVT. COCOON MARKET CTRI,
MOHANKUMAR            CENTRAL SILK BOARD,
B SHELAR
                      BM ROAD RAMANAGAR, BENGALURU.
Digitally signed by
                                                                      ...RESPONDENT
MOHANKUMAR B
SHELAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
                      (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR & SMT. KAVYA C. SHETTAR, ADVOCATES)
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH



                            THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT
                      ACT, 1984 ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE
                      ORDER DATED 01.02.2022 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL
                      JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI, PASSED IN CRL.MISC.
                      NO.279/2018 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.


                      IN RPFC NO.100105 OF 2022 (-)
                      BETWEEN:
                      DEVANNA Y. KARLI,
                      AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
                             -2-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289
                                  RPFC No. 100078 of 2022
                              C/W RPFC No. 100105 of 2022



R/O. GOVERNMENT COCCON MARKET,
CTRI CENTRAL SILK BOARD, BM ROAD,
RAMANAGAR, BENGALURU-562 108.
                                                 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR & SMT. KAVYA C. SHETTAR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1.   CHANDRAKALA W/O. DEVANNA KARLI,
     AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER,
     R/O. PLOT NO.9, BASAVA LAYOUT,
     NAVANAGAR, NEAR SAI MANDIR ,
     HUBBALLI-580020, DIST: DHARWAD.

2.   PAVITRA D/O. DEVANNA KARLI,
     AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: ENGINEER,
     NOW R/O. PLOT NO.9, BASAVA LAYOUT,
     NAVANAGAR, NEAR SAI MANDIR ,
     HUBBALLI-580020, DIST: DHARWAD.

3.   BHAVANA @ DEEPA D/O. DEVANNA KARLI,
     AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
     R/O. PLOT NO.9, BASAVA LAYOUT,
     NAVANAGAR, NEAR SAI MANDIR ,
     HUBBALLI-580020, DIST: DHARWAD.

4.   LIPIKA D/O. DEVANNA KARLI,
     AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
     SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER NEXT FRIEND,
     CHANDRAKALA W/O. DEVANNA KARLI,
     R/O. PLOT NO.9, BASAVA LAYOUT,
     NAVANAGAR, NEAR SAI MANDIR ,
     HUBBALLI-580020, DIST: DHARWAD.
                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ROSHAN SAHEB CHABBI, ADVOCATE)
     THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY
COURT ACT TO ALLOW THE PETITION SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER
PASSED IN CRL.MISC. NO. 279/2018 DATED 01.02.2022 PASSED BY
THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI.

     THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                         -3-
                                                   NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289
                                              RPFC No. 100078 of 2022
                                          C/W RPFC No. 100105 of 2022



CORAM:         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

                                 ORAL ORDER

1. RPFC No.100078/2022 is filed by the petitioner

No.1 in Crl.Misc.No.279/2018 challenging the order dated

01.02.2022 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court,

Hubballi1 dismissing the petition insofar as petitioner No.1

is concerned.

2. RPFC No.100105/2022 is filed by the

respondent in Crl.Misc.No.279/2018 on the file of the

Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi seeking setting

aside the order dated 01.02.2022.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are

referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court.

4. It is the case of the petitioners before the

Family Court that the marriage between petitioner No.1

with the respondent was solemnized during 1995 at

Tirupati and in their wedlock three children were born

namely petitioners No.2 to 4. It is stated in the petition

Hereinafter referred to as 'Family Court'

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289

that, the respondent was working as a Technical Assistant

at Government Cocoon (Silk) Market, Central Silk Board,

Ramanagara and also working at various places at

Mehabbobnagar, Dharmavaram and such other places in

Andhra Pradesh and was not looking after the needs of

petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners have filed

Crl.Misc.No.279/2018 on the ground that the respondent is

having sufficient means, however neglected the petitioners

herein and they were not able to get the livelihood and

their educational prospects.

5. After service of notice, the respondent -

husband entered appearance and filed detailed statement

of objection contending that the petitioner No.1 herself

deserted the respondent and not responded to lead happy

marital life. It is also stated that the amount claimed by

the petitioners is on higher side and accordingly it is

contended that the petition requires to be dismissed by

the Family Court.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289

6. The Family Court after considering the material

on record, by its order dated 01.02.2022 dismissed the

petition insofar as petitioner No.1 is concerned, however,

directed the respondent - husband to pay maintenance of

Rs.8,000/- per month each to petitioners No.2 to 4.

Feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner No.1 has

preferred RPFC 100078/2022, whereas, the respondent -

husband has preferred RPFC No.100105/2022.

7. I have heard Sri.Roshan Saheb Chabbi, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner - wife and Smt.Kavya

C Shettar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent -

husband.

8. It is contended by the learned counsel for the

petitioners that the Family Court has erred in not

considering the fact that the respondent - husband himself

has left the matrimonial home and therefore the

conclusion arrived by the Family Court that petitioner No.1

was not ready to lead conjugal life with the respondent-

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289

husband is incorrect and accordingly, sought for

interference of this Court.

9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent - husband sought to justify the impugned

order insofar as petitioner No.1 is concerned and

submitted that as there is no cause for petitioner No.1 -

wife to lead the conjugal life with respondent - husband

and therefore, the Family Court has rightly dismissed the

petition insofar as petitioner No.1 is concerned. It is also

contended that, maintenance awarded insofar as the

children is on higher side.

10. Having taken note of the submissions made by

the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that

the marriage between petitioner No.1 with the respondent

was solemnized during 1995 and in their wedlock three

children were born namely petitioners No.2 to 4. Perusal of

the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate

that the respondent - husband was working at various

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289

places and petitioners were residing in the house

belonging to respondent - husband.

11. However, taking into consideration the age of

petitioner No.1 is concerned as well as she has to take

care of three grown up daughters, and in that view of the

matter, it is a fit case to remand the case to the Family

Court for fresh consideration insofar as granting

maintenance to petitioner No.1 is concerned, in the light of

the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Rajnesh vs Neha and Another reported in (2021) 2

SCC 324, wherein it is held that maintenance of wife is for

subsistence and cannot be deprived of the same. It is also

made clear that, the award of maintenance to children

(petitioner Nos.2 to 4) is just and proper.

12. In that view of the matter, I find force in the

submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

in RPFC No.100078/2022. Accordingly, I pass the

following:

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289

ORDER

(i) RPFC No.100078/2022 is allowed.

(ii) RPFC No.100105/2022 is dismissed.

(iii) Crl.Misc.No.279/2018 is remitted to the Principal

Judge, Family Court, Hubballi only in insofar as

petitioner No.1 is concerned for fresh disposal.

(iv) The Family Court shall provide fair opportunity to

both the parties and to pass appropriate orders

taking into consideration the declaration of law

made by this Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court

relating to payment of maintenance to the

housewife.

(v) In order to avoid further delay in the matter, as

the parties are represented through learned

counsels, the parties are directed to appear

before the Family Court on 26.03.2025 at 11.00

a.m.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4289