- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5537 OF 2024 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI AMRUTH KUMAR S/O ASHWATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT SABBANAHALLI VILLAGE, NAGARAGERE HOBLI GOWRIBIDNUR TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT -561 228 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHANALAKSHMI K.,ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. VARALAKSHMI W/O AMRUT KUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT LAKSHMIPURA BESIDE SUNKALAMA TEMPLE SRIKANTAPURA POST HINDUPUR TALUK ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515 2021 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.RAJESWARA P N.,ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GUDIBANDE DATED 25.3.2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-G IN M.C.NO.27/2023. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner - husband questioning the order dated 25th March 2023 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande, on the application filed under Section - 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in M.C. No.27/2023, whereby the trial Court granted interim maintenance of Rs.35,000/- per month to the respondent - wife from the date of the order. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondent. 3. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the petitioner - husband that while considering the application filed by the respondent - wife for maintenance, the trial Court has not provided an opportunity to the petitioner to file objections to the application and so also assets and liabilities statements were not filed by either of the parties. Therefore, there was absolutely no material placed on record by the respondent - wife to show the correct income of the petitioner and based on the self serving statement of the respondent - - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 wife, the impugned order is passed awarding exhoribitant maintenance of Rs.35,000/- per month. It is also contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial Court ought to have directed both the parties to file assets and liabilities statement and based on the said statements, trial Court ought have considered the application on merits by providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. The same having not been done, the impugned order is in contravention to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh -vs- Neha and another reported in (2021)2 SCC 324. Admittedly, the respondent - wife has not placed any material in respect of proof of income of the petitioner, so also nothing is produced to show her income, qualification or assets and liabilities. Hence, learned counsel seeks to set aside the impugned order passed by the trial Court. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent - wife contends that the petitioner is aware of the proceedings before the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Gowribidanur, in which Court the application for maintenance came to be filed and thereafter, the matter came to be transferred to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande as per the orders of the Principal District - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 Judge, Chikkaballapur. Therefore, it is well within the knowledge of the petitioner with regard to filing of the application for maintenance. It is also stated that nothing prevented the petitioner from filing assets and liabilities statement and contesting the matter. He further contends that the petitioner is deliberately prolonging the matter and he has not paid even single penny either to the respondent or to the minor child. Therefore, he contends that the impugned order is just and proper and sustainable and seeks for dismissal of the petition. 5. Having heard learned counsels for the parties, it is seen that the relationship between the parties is not in dispute and the two children born from the wedlock is also not in dispute. However, male child is with the father and female child is with the mother. Admittedly, both the parties have not filed the assets and liabilities statements, which is the requirement to consider the application for maintenance, in view of the judgment in the case of Rajnesh stated supra. In the absence of assets and liabilities statement, it would become difficult for the trial Court as well as this Court to award maintenance and in that event, the Court can award - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 maintenance only on the basis of guess work, which may not be appropriate as it would cause hardship to one party and benefit to the other party. In the case on hand, no materials are placed to show the correct income of the petitioner - husband. The trial Court has not provided sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to file objections and contest the application and it has decided only on the basis of the averments made by the respondent in the affidavit annexed to the application. Further, no opportunity is provided to either of the parties to file the assets and liabilities statement, which is the requirement to consider the application for maintenance as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh stated supra. Hence, the impugned order, in my opinion is not sustainable in law. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to remit the matter back to the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande to decide the application for maintenance afresh by providing reasonable opportunity to both parties to place on record assets and liabilities statements and argue the matter afresh. 6. Be that as it may, the application for maintenance is filed on 13.10.2022. Therefore, some amount of maintenance - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 would have to be awarded to the minor child - Madhuri immediately. It is the duty and responsibility of both parents to take care of the minor child. It is seen that in the present case, male child is with the father and female child is with the mother. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner - father to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month towards maintenance of the minor child - Madhuri, which shall be remitted to the account of the respondent - mother. 7. With regard to maintenance of mother and for enhancement of maintenance to the minor child - Madhuri, both parties are at liberty to agitate the same before the trial Court. 8. In view of the above discussion, I pass the following: O R D E R i) Petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 25th March 2023 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande, in M.C. No.27/2023, is hereby set aside. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 iii) The matter is remitted back to the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande to consider interlocutory application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act afresh by providing reasonable opportunity to both parties to file their assets and liabilities statement and address the arguments. iv) In the meanwhile, petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) per month towards maintenance of the minor child - Miss Madhuri, which shall be remitted to the account of the respondent- wife by way of electronic transfer, upon respondent- wife furnishing the relevant bank details. v) The petitioner shall pay the arrears of maintenance at the rate of Rs.5000/- per month to the minor child within a period of three months from today. vi) Learned Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande shall dispose of the application for maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8908 WP No. 5537 of 2024 vii) Parties shall cooperate for early disposal of the application for maintenance. viii) All contentions of the parties are kept open. ix) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43