- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 15979 OF 2024 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI. ABHISHEK KUMAR S/O MURARI PRASAD AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS FLAT NO.202, SV NILAYAM 4TH CROSS, BABUSAPALYA BENGALURU-560 043 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA B, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ARATI KUMARI D/O RAVINDRA KUAMR SINHA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT TALAB KE PAS CHOTAKI SARIMPUR KALI STHAM KE PAS BUXAR, BIHAR-802 101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAVEENDRAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 28(2) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 12.06.2023 PASSED BY THE VI ADDL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT BENGALURU IN MC 1331/2021 ON IA NO. III FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT BY THE RESPONDENT AS PER ANNX-J AND ETC. Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner- husband, being aggrieved by the order passed on I.A.No.III in M.C.No.1331/2021 dated 12.06.2023 by the VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the wife from the date of filing of I.A.No.III, i.e., on 23.12.2021, and one-time litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband submits that the respondent/wife is gainfully employed, working as a teacher and earning an amount of Rs.18,000/- per month. It is submitted that the bank statement filed by him before the Court clearly shows that she is gainfully employed. Another fact is that the petitioner lost his job in the month of April, rejoined in the month of January and he did not have the means to take care of himself, that particular aspect was not considered by the Family Court. Further, it is submitted that the wife deserted the husband, on - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 the ground of desertion, he has filed the MC seeking divorce. He further submits that the wife filed a counterclaim seeking a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. When the wife has deserted the husband, she is not entitled for maintenance. 3. Learned counsel relied on the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in MFA.No.5732/2015 C/w RPFC.No.125/2025 dated 10.03.2023 between SMT.SHUBHA and SRI. H. SATISH and submits that in the light of the said judgment, the wife has deserted the husband and she is not entitled for any maintenance. Further, he submits that the salary of the husband is an amount of Rs.70,000/- and the Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.20,000/- per month, which is on the higher side. He further submits that the Court, without considering all these aspects, passed an impugned order, which needs to be set aside. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/wife submits that the Bank Statement discloses that in the months of April, May and June, an amount of Rs.18,000/- was remitted to the account of the respondent/wife. It is also stated in the written argument that in a particular school, the teacher, who - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 is on leave, have taken her service without any appointment for the brief period of three months that she worked. It is submitted that at the time of marriage, there was a pre-condition that she should stop work, as such, she stopped working. Learned counsel further submits that the ground of desertion and all other aspects have to be decided by the Court during the course of the trial. At this stage, there cannot be a finding with regard to desertion, as the wife is not able to maintain herself and the husband has sufficient earning income. Hence, the wife is entitled for maintenance. 5. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on record. 6. According to the wife, she is unemployed and the husband is working. The husband denied this fact, however, he has placed before the Court evidence showing that between April 2022 and December 2022, he was removed from service and was not working. The grounds raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband are: The first ground is with regard to desertion and she is not entitled for the maintenance, the second ground is that she is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 gainfully employed and the third ground is that he was not working from April 2022 to December 2022 which was not considered by the Family Court. 7. Coming to the first ground with regard to the desertion in the judgment relied on by the learned counsel, the said judgment does not relate to the facts and circumstances of the case. In the judgment referred supra, there was a finding by the Court with regard to desertion, basing on that the Court has given a finding that she is not entitled for maintenance, and that stage has not come in this case. The Family Court has yet to decide with regard to the desertion as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court cannot appreciate the evidence, at this stage, whether there is desertion or not. 8. Coming to the second ground i.e., raised with regard to her gainful employment, the petition was filed in the year 2021, according to the husband, the wife is working even from that day and she is gainful employed but the material that placed on record which relying is about the salaries in the months of April, May and June, 2022 and how that amounts are credited into the account of wife. The arguments that are put forth by the learned counsel for the respondent and the written - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 arguments that are placed before the Family Court are convincing and basing on that this Court cannot come to a conclusion that she is gainfully employed as on the date of the petition and as on the date of passing of the order. In that case, when the husband is employed and according to the counsel, he is earning an amount of Rs.70,000/- is admitted. The maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- per month granted by the Family Court cannot be interfered. 9. Coming to the third ground, i.e., raised with regard to the husband had lost his job, he was not earning between April to December 2022 and was unemployed. Considering the fact that he was out of a job between April 2022 and December 2022 and the fact that the wife had income in the months of April, May, and June, 2022, this Court is of the view that the husband need not to pay maintenance to the wife between April and December 2022 as ordered by the Family Court. As far as the maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- and one time litigation expenses are concerned, is confirmed. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18610 WP No. 15979 of 2024 ORDER i) The impugned order dated 12.06.2023 passed on I.A.No.III in M.C.No.1331/2021 by the VI Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru is hereby modified to the extent that between April to December, 2022, the wife is not entitled for maintenance and in all other respect the order of the Family Court is affirmed. ii) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KTY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27