- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19790 WP No. 11979 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 11979 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI. LATESH AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. DAMODAR POOJARY, R/AT 201, STANS MARK, LOBO COMPOUND, ALAKE, MANGALORE -575 003 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. DEEPIKA AGED 29 YEARS W/O. LATESH POOJARY, D/O. VISHWANATH AMIN, R/AT 1-44-5, V.R.COMPOUND PERMUDE, MANGALORE – 574 509 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.FEBA NISHA, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IND, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED: 18.03.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-G PASSED BY THE COURT I ADDL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, D.K. MANGALORE ON IA NO.III IN MC NO.247/2024 GRANTING MAINTENANCE TO THE TUNE OF RS. 15,000/- PER MONTH. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19790 WP No. 11979 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.3 in M.C.No.247/2024 dated 18.03.2025 by the I Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangalore, whereby the Family Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month to the wife from the date of application till the determination of this case, the husband is before this Court. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. It is the case that the husband had filed the M.C.No.247/2024 seeking decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and the wife had filed the instant I.A.No.3 seeking maintenance of an amount of Rs.35,000/- per month to herself pending disposal of the case. It is her case that she is working as a software engineer and earning an amount of Rs.26,800/- per month and the husband is a bank manager and according to the her, his salary is Rs.1,50,000/- per month. The Family Court had considered the fact that the gross salary of the husband is Rs.1,22,652.69/- and after the deductions, he is getting an amount of Rs.70,079.72/-. The Family Court had - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19790 WP No. 11979 of 2025 observed that the husband had availed the advance to the tune of Rs.9,49,164/- and his termed deposits would be Rs.4,82,830/-. Operating profit is shown as Rs.23,390/- and net profit is Rs.13,002/-. The husband has stated about the five loans that are pending and his liability of payments and his total EMI is shown as Rs.34,000/- per month. Several share investments are shown by the husband and also produced the statement of bank accounts, the income tax for the period from 2022-23 to 2024-25 and his total income is shown as Rs.14,46,660/- for the year 2024-25. Considering the fact that the wife is earning an amount of Rs.28,500/- per month, the Family Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month to the wife. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband submits that the marriage had lasted less than a year. She deserted the husband and even in the petition that is filed it is nowhere stated about her salary and requirements. She has stated that she has to take care of her parents and her father is a pensioner. It is further submitted that she is able to earn for herself and she is in a position to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19790 WP No. 11979 of 2025 maintain herself. In those circumstances, she is not entitled for any maintenance from the husband as such this Court may direct the Family Court to dispose of the main petition itself in these facts and circumstances. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/wife submits that in fact, there has been suppression on the part of the husband all through. It was stated before the Family Court that he is getting a salary of Rs.70,000/- per month and when the salary slip is placed before the Court, then it has come to the light that his salary is Rs.1,22,000/- and odd per month. It is further submitted that as the wife is not in a position to bear her expenses, she is residing with her father and when the husband is earning sufficiently, it is his duty to maintain the wife and as submitted by the Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the husband, the wife has not deserted the husband, in fact she has been thrown out of the matrimonial home and as such she has been staying along with her parents. It is further submitted that in fact when she had asked for an amount of Rs.35,000/- per month as maintenance, without considering the fact the Family Court had granted only an amount of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19790 WP No. 11979 of 2025 Rs.15,000/- per month as maintenance. It is her case that the Family Court ought to have granted an amount of Rs.35,000/- per month as maintenance. However, she submits that they have not preferred any appeal questioning the order impugned. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The husband’s salary is Rs.1,20,000/- and odd per month and all the deductions that are shown are the loans and other things which he has taken. He is working as a bank manager and his take home salary is Rs.70,000/- and odd per month. As per the material on record, the wife is earning an amount of Rs.26,800/- per month. Whether the wife had deserted the husband or there is any cruelty on the part of the husband, this Court cannot go into all these aspects at this point of time. As submitted by the Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the husband, the wife is capable of earning and she is also earning. While considering the interim maintenance, what the Court has to see is the facts of the case. Whether considering the income of both the parties, whether the amount that the wife is earning, whether the amount that is earned by the wife is sufficient to maintain - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19790 WP No. 11979 of 2025 herself and whether the husband is in a portion to take care of the wife or pay the maintenance to the wife. In the light of the above discussion with regard to the husband’s income, this Court is of the view that the maintenance amount granted by the Family Court is just and reasonable and this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Family Court. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19