Karnataka High Court
Smt Lakshmi W/O Ningappa Bagali vs Ningappa S/O Mailrappa on 19 March, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5062
RPFC No. 100214 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100214 OF 2022 (-)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. LAKSHMI W/O. NINGAPPA BAGALI,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. RAJIVGANDHI NAGAR, GADAG,
TAL AND DIST: GADAG-582101.
2. SUSHMA D/O. NINGAPPA BAGALI,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. RAJIVGANDHI NAGAR, GADAG,
TAL AND DIST: GADAG-582101.
3. AKSHATA D/O. NINGAPPA BAGALI,
AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. RAJIVGANDHI NAGAR, GADAG,
TAL AND DIST: GADAG-582101.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. VIJAY M. MALALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
NINGAPPA S/O. MAILRAPPA,
Digitally signed by
ASHPAK
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: RTD. K.E.B. EMPLOYEE,
KASHIMSA R/O. RAJIVGANDHI NAGAR, GADAG,
MALAGALADINNI
Location: HIGH TAL AND DIST: GADAG-582101.
COURT OF ...RESPONDENT
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
Date: 2025.03.22 (BY SRI. KIRAN M. GOLI, ADVOCATE)
15:55:15 +0530
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY
COURT ACT 1984 PRAYING SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
08.07.2022 PASSED BY THE COURT OF IST ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL
JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, GADAG IN CRL. MISC. NO.52/2020 MARKED
AT ANNEXURE-A AND GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5062
RPFC No. 100214 of 2022
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed by the petitioners assailing the Order
dated 08.07.2022 in Crl.Misc.No.52/2020 on the file of I Addl.
Prl. Judge, Family Court, Gadag, dismissing the petition.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred with
reference to their ranking before the Family Court, Gadag.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner No.1 is the
legally wedded wife of respondent and in their wedlock,
petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were born. It is also stated in the
petition that the respondent was treating the petitioners
inhumanly and also not providing sufficient means for livelihood
and as such, the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.52/2020
on the file of I Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Gadag, seeking
maintenance.
4. After service of notice, respondent entered appearance
and filed detailed objection and contended that petitioner No.1
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5062
is not the legally wedded wife of respondent and petitioner
Nos.2 and 3 are not his children. Accordingly it is submitted
that he married one Vijayalaxmi, however, due to matrimonial
dispute, said Vijayalaxmi had filed Crl.Misc.No.185/2011 before
the II JMFC Cour at Hubballi under Section 12 of the Domestic
Violence Act, and accordingly the respondent sought for
dismissal of the petition.
5. The Family Court, after considering the material on
record, by its Order dated 08.07.2022, dismissed the petition.
Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred
this Revision Petition.
6. I have heard Sri. Vijay M. Malali, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Sri. Kiran M. Goli, learned counsel for the
respondent.
7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners
that the reasons assigned by the Family Court requires to be
interfered with and accordingly sought for allowing this petition.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submitted
that respondent has disputed his relationship with petitioner
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5062
No.1 and accordingly sought to justify the impugned order
passed by the Family Court.
9. In the light of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the parties, I have carefully examined the reasons
assigned by the Family Court, particularly in paragraph No. 21
of the Order dated 08.07.2022.
10. Taking into consideration the fact that it is well
established in law that strict proof of marriage is not condition
precedent for award of maintenance under Section 125 of
Cr.P.C. which aspect was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of CHANMUNIYA VS VIRENDRA KUMAR
SINGH KUSHWAHA & ANR reported in 2011 1 SCC 141 and
in that view of the matter, the reason assigned by the Family
Court is erroneous and contrary to the aforesaid Judgment.
11. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 08.07.2022 in C.Misc.No.52/2020
on the file of I Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Gadag
is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5062
Family Court, Gadag for fresh consideration in the
light of the observation made above.
(iii) In order to avoid any further delay in the matter,
since the parties are represented through their
learned counsel, parties are directed to appear
before the Family Court, Gadag on 23.04.2025 at
11.00 a.m. without waiting for any further notice in
the matter. On their appearance, the Family Court,
Gadag is requested to dispose of the matter at the
earliest.
Sd/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
sac
CT-MCK
