- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1980 RPFC No. 100010 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100010 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SHRI KAREPPA B. CHUNCHANUR AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. CONSTABLE (BSF), R/O. SHINGANAHALLI, TQ. & DIST. DHARWAD-581204 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT C/O. THE COMMANDING OFFICER, 13 BATTALION, BSF BARMER (RAJASTHAN) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. DEMAVVA @ KAVYA K. CHUNCHANUR, W/O. KAREPPA B. CHUNCHANUR, AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. TEGUR, PO. TIGADOLLI, TQ. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI-591115. …RESPONDENT THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER IN CRL.MISC.NO.148/2020 DATED 08.11.2024 BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD, AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE PETITION FILED BY RESPONDENT WIFE U/SEC.125 OF CR.P.C. BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.06 16:13:54 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1980 RPFC No. 100010 of 2025 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH) 1. This revision petition is filed by the respondent – husband challenging the order dated 08.11.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.148/2020 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dharwad1 awarding maintenance to the respondent herein. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioner before the Family Court that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 27.04.2018 at Shinganahalli village and in their wedlock no children were born. It is further stated in the petition that the respondent – husband was working as a constable in Border Security Force and petitioner at the time of marriage was working as guest lecturer in ITI College. The 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1980 RPFC No. 100010 of 2025 petitioner has stated in the petition that the respondent has not taken care of the needs of the petitioner as a dutiful wife and also made certain allegation against the respondent – husband not only for seeking dowry but also insofar as family disputes are concerned and accordingly, the petitioner has filed Crl.Misc.No.148/2020 seeking maintenance. 4. After service of notice, the respondent – husband entered appearance and filed detailed statement of objection admitting the relationship as husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 27.04.2018, however, denied the allegation made with regard to the claim for dowry as well as the relationship of respondent – husband with other woman and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 08.11.2024, allowed the petition in part by directing the respondent – husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.15,000/- to the petitioner - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1980 RPFC No. 100010 of 2025 - wife. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this revision petition. 6. I have heard Sri.R.H.Angadi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the records. 7. Sri.R.H.Angadi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the respondent herein was working as guest lecturer in ITI College and the said aspect has not been considered by the Family Court while awarding maintenance to the respondent herein. It is also his submission that the petitioner herein has filed M.C.No.87/2021 seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the said petition came to be allowed, however, the respondent herein willfully not joining the matrimonial home and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 8. Having taken note of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is not in dispute that the marriage between the petitioner and the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1980 RPFC No. 100010 of 2025 respondent was solemnized on 27.04.2018 at Shinganahalli village and thereafter the parties are residing in the matrimonial home, however, the respondent herein has made certain allegation against the petitioner herein that the petitioner herein was not in cordial relationship with the respondent herein and accordingly she left the matrimonial home. Taking into consideration the finding recorded by the Family Court that the complaint was lodged against the petitioner herein by the respondent on 12.07.2020 in Women Police Station and thereafter the matter was compromised, however, the same was given effect to continue the conjugal relationship. In that view of the matter, as the parties are residing separately, the respondent herein is entitled for maintenance. 9. Insofar as quantification of maintenance is concerned, it is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the respondent herein is working as lecturer in ITI college, however, taking into account the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1980 RPFC No. 100010 of 2025 finding recorded by the Family Court at para No.18 that as the petitioner herein is working in BSF and as per the documents produced Exs.C.1 and C.2, which makes it clear that the salary of the petitioner is Rs.41,700/- per month and taking into consideration the fact that the respondent herein is residing separately at Tigadolli village, Kittur Taluk, Belagavi District and is not working as argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I am of the view that grant of maintenance of Rs.15,000/- by the Family Court is just and proper which does not require interference by this Court in the revisional jurisdiction. 10. Accordingly, the revision petition fails and is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SH LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 23