- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 155 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI K.SHIVAIAH (SHIVU), S/O LATE APPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R.AT NO.10/6, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, GANGAPPA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032. …PETITIONER (BY SMT.BHARATHI M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT.C.V.NAYANASHREE (VARSHA), W/O K.SHIVAIAH (SHIVU). D/O VENKATESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 2. CHI. SAI SURAJ S., S/O K.SHIVAIAH (SHIVU), AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SMT.C.V.NAYANASHREE (VARSHA). BOTH ARE R/AT: 72/1A, C/O VENKATESHAPPA, SHIVAKUMAR BUILDING, SHANKARAPPA LAYOUT, BOMMASANDRA POST, HEBBAGODI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 099. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI CHOKKAREDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 - MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1) Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(2) AND (4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984 TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.10.2022 PASSED IN C.MISC.NO.338/2019 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU AND AWARDING MAINTENANCE OF RS.15,000/- PER MONTH FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 AND RS.10,000/- FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 FROM THE DATE OF THE PETITION AND ALSO ALLOWED PETITION WITH COST OF RS.5,000/- AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner-husband challenging the order dated 06.10.2022 passed in C.Misc.No.338/2019 by I Additional Principal Family Court at Bengaluru, the petitioner-husband is before this Court seeking to set aside the same. 2. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that respondent No.1 is the wife and respondent No.2 is the minor child, pursuant to the marriage solemnised on 20.06.2010, the respondent lives in the matrimonial home, started residing separately and thereafter, she preferred a petition for maintenance under - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 Section 125 of Cr.P.C. in the year 2019. The marriage and the birth of the child are not in dispute. However, the petitioner-husband disputes all other averments made by the respondent-wife in the petition filed before the Family Court and also admits that he is employed and working in BWSSB. 2.1 Learned counsel further contends that respondent No.1-wife is also working in a garment factory and earning income. It is also contended by him that he was not provided an opportunity to cross-examine respondent No.1-PW.1 and so also, he was unable to produce any evidence by himself by getting into the witness box. Therefore, the judgment rendered by the Family Court is one-sided, as no assets and liabilities have been sought for by the Family Court, and on the basis of the statement made that he was working in BWSSB earning a salary of Rs.40,000/- per month, the Family Court awarded Rs.25,000/- as maintenance, which is - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 exorbitantly high and unreasonable, as he is also liable to maintain his parents. 2.2 It is fairly contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner is agreeing to take care of respondent No.2-minor child, but with regard to respondent No.1-wife, he contends that she is employed and has her own source of income, which would be placed, if an opportunity is provided before the Family Court. On these grounds, he seeks to set aside the impugned order and remit back the matter to the Family Court for consideration of fresh on merits by providing an opportunity to the petitioner. 3. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondents contended that the petitioner had appeared before the Family Court and filed statement of objections and thereafter, deliberately remained absent. He cross- examined PW.1 and he had not placed any materials before the Court to show any income or source of income of respondent No.1-wife. There is no dispute with regard - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 to the marital relationship and also the birth of the child. Therefore, he sustains the order passed by the Family Court and seeks dismissal of this petition. 4. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent, the fact remains that though the petitioner participated in the proceedings before the Family Court, he was unable to cross-examine respondent No.1-PW.1 fully, so also, he has not led his evidence or produced any documents. 5. Though both learned counsels submit that the Family Court directed the parties to file their assets and liabilities, which were not filed before the Court. It is the duty and responsibility of both the parties to file their assets and liabilities for consideration of the quantum of maintenance to be awarded. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the matter deserves to be remitted back to the Family Court for fresh consideration to provide an opportunity to the petitioner and the respondent to file their assets and liabilities, and also for - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 the petitioner to cross-examine respondent No.1-wife and also adduce evidence, if any, and place all relevant materials. Thereafter, the Family Court shall decide the matter in accordance with the law. 6. In view of the maintenance petition having been filed in the year 2019 and the relationship not being denied and admitted by the petitioner, the revision being filed in the year 2023. The petitioner only deposited Rs.50,000/- before the Family Court. Therefore, no amount other than this has been deposited. In view of the petitioner having admitted his relationship with respondent No.1 and his employment in BWSSB, this Court deems it appropriate to pass an order of maintenance. Therefore, the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to respondent No.2-minor child and Rs.7,500/- per month to respondent No.1-wife till the disposal of the main petition before the Family Court. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 7. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) The impugned order dated 06.10.2022 passed in C.Misc.No.338/2019 passed by the Court of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru, is hereby set aside. iii) The matter is remitted back to I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru to decide the matter afresh in accordance with the law. iv) The Family Court shall provide a reasonable opportunity to both the parties to place any such materials, adduce evidence and cross- examine the witnesses. v) Both parties shall co-operate with the Family Court in expeditious disposal in accordance with the provisions under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. vi) The petitioner shall pay Rs.7,500/- per month to respondent No.1-wife and Rs.10,000/- per month to respondent No.2-minor child till the disposal of the main petition. vii) The petitioner shall pay arrears of maintenance at the rate of Rs.17,500/- per month from the date of petition and the same - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:6376 RPFC No. 155 of 2023 shall be deposited or paid to the account of the respondent No.1 upon respondent No.1 furnishing the required Bank details. The said arrears shall be paid within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. viii) Both parties shall appear before I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru on 12.03.2025 without awaiting any further notice either from this Court or from the Family Court. ix) The Family Court shall dispose of the matter expeditiously. x) Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN CT: BHK