- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4314 OF 2024 (GM-FC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 8219 OF 2023 (GM-FC) IN WP No. 4314/2024 BETWEEN: SRI. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE VEERANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3, MARUTHI NILAYA RAMAGONDANAHALLI, ESCORTS LAYOUT SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560 064 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.P. SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ARCHANA W/O SRI. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.6 ANJANEYASWAMY TEMPLE STREET ANCHEPALYA, NAGASANDRA POST TUMKUR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 073 …RESPONDENT (BY MISS. B. PAULINE PRIYANKA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT. 03/11/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 I ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT BENGALURU IN MC 2221/2021 UNDER ANNEXURE-F. IN WP NO. 8219/2023 BETWEEN: SRI. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE VEERANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3, MARUTHI NILAYA RAMAGONDANAHALLI, ESCORTS LAYOUT SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560 064 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.P. SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ARCHANA W/O SRI. MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.6 ANJANEYASWAMY TEMPLE STREET ANCHEPALYA, NAGASANDRA POST TUMKUR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 073 ...RESPONDENT (BY MISS. B. PAULINE PRIYANKA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 15.02.2023 PASSED IN MC NO.2221/2021 BY THE I ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE ON IA NO.2 (ANNX-A) AS ILLEGAL. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER These two petitions are filed by the petitioner - husband, who had initiated the petition under Section 13 (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act against the respondent - wife for divorce. 2. In WP.No.4314/2024, the petitioner is questioning the order dated 03.11.2023, whereby the Family Court dismissed the petition for non compliance of the order of maintenance. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the Family Court is arbitrary, illegal and perverse. The same requires to be set aside. 4. He further contends that though the petitioner has not paid the amount of maintenance, it cannot be the reason for dismissal of the main petition. Therefore, he seeks to set aside the order and permit him to contest the matter on its merits. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 5. Per contra, Miss. Paulina Priyanka B., learned counsel representing the respondent vehemently contends that the impugned order is sustainable, as despite several opportunities being granted by the Court, the petitioner has not complied the order dated 15.02.2023, whereby this Court ordered maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent - wife and Rs.10,000/- each to the two children, which has not been complied. Hence, the Family Court is justified in dismissing the petition for non compliance of the order. On these grounds she seeks dismissal of the petition. 6. In WP.No.8219/2023, the petitioner - husband is questioning the impugned order dated 15.02.2023, whereby the learned Family Court Judge passed an order of maintenance on IA.No.2 granting interim maintenance of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent - wife and Rs.10,000/- each to two children, totally amounting to Rs.40,000/- per month. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 7. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner - husband that the impugned order is illegal, arbitrary and passed without providing an opportunity to the petitioner to defend his case and file his assets and liabilities. Without any material on record, said order has been passed, so also, the respondent has not filed the details of her assets and liabilities. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the ground of it being arbitrary and unreasonable. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent - wife sustains the impugned order and contends that despite sufficient opportunity being granted, the petitioner has not filed objections, so also, assets and liabilities. Nothing prevented him from filing assets and liabilities to contest the matter and address his arguments. There is no dispute with regard to two children who were born to the petitioner and respondent. Therefore, the petitioner is liable to maintain the children and also the respondent - - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 wife. Hence, the impugned order is justified and she seeks dismissal of the petition. 9. On careful perusal of the impugned order in both the cases, it is seen that the Family Court has proceeded further to dismiss the petition on 03.11.2023 on the ground that the petitioner - husband has not complied the order of maintenance, granted on 15.02.2023 and dismissed the petition for non compliance solely on the ground of non payment of interim maintenance amount. 10. I am of view that the impugned order cannot be sustained. The petition filed by the petitioner for divorce cannot be dismissed for non compliance of the order by the Family Court without going to the merits of the case. The Family Court ought to have decided the matter on its merits, rather than dismissing it for non compliance. In such cases, the Family Court is at liberty to proceed further, for if any execution petition is filed, the respondent is at liberty to execute the order of recovery of - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 the maintenance amount in accordance with law. Dismissal of the petition on the ground of non compliance cannot be sustained. Hence, the same requires to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside. 11. With regard to the order questioned in WP.No.8219/2023, whereby interim maintenance of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent - wife and Rs.10,000/- each to two children is awarded, the petitioner seeks to set aside this order in view of having not participated and contested the matter . It is also his contention that the respondent is working and earning and is not entitled to maintenance. This Court, vide order dated 22.05.2023, stayed the order with regard to the payment of Rs.20,000/- to the respondent - wife. However, sustained the order with regard to payment of maintenance to two children at Rs.10,000/- each, which has been paid by the petitioner and by even date order, the respondent - wife is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 12. As stated earlier, the impugned order on the maintenance has been passed without hearing the petitioner - husband. The assets and liabilities have not been filed by both parties. Therefore, both parties shall file their assets and liabilities and the Family Court shall provide an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the matter on its merits. 13. Till then, this Court deems it appropriate that the petitioner shall pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent- wife as against Rs.20,000/- and Rs.5,000/- each to two children, which would be Rs.20,000/- in all as against Rs.40,000/-. 14. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) These two petitions are allowed in part. ii) The impugned order dated 03.11.2023 on the file of the Ist Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru in - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 MC.No.2221/2021 under Annexure - F is hereby set aside. It is restored to its file. iii) The Family Court shall decide the matter expeditiously on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, WP.No.8219/2023 is also allowed. iv) The order dated 15.02.2023 passed on IA.No.2 is hereby set aside, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.10,000/- to the respondent -wife and Rs.5,000/- each to the two children till the application of IA.No.2 is once again considered afresh by providing an opportunity to the petitioner as well as the respondent. v) The petitioner and respondent shall file their assets and liabilities before the Family Court. vi) It is needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinions on the merits of the matter. vii) The parties are at liberty to agitate the matter by filing or furnishing fresh documents before the Court. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:3303 WP No. 4314 of 2024 C/W WP No. 8219 of 2023 viii) The Family Court shall pass orders on IA.No.2 independently without being influenced by any of the opinion expressed by this Court. ix) Pending interlocutory applications, if any, pales into insignificance. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8