- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2960 RPFC No. 100017 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100017 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SOMASHEKHAR S/O. VISHNU BHIMANNAVAR AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O PLOT NO.19, RENAUKA NILAY JANESHWAR NAGAR, AMBEDKAR NAGAR ROAD, HUKKERIKAR NAGAR, YALAKKISHETTAR COLONY, DHARWAD-580001. RESPONDENT NO.1 BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. TRIVENI W/O. SOMASHEKHAR BHIMANNAVAR, AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. C/O. ASHOK B. RAYANNAVAR, PLOT NO.4857/65/7TH CROSS 5TH MAIN, NEAR LAST BUS STOP SADASHIVA NAGAR BELAGAVI-590001. 2. ATHARV S/O. SOMASHEKHAR BHIMANNAVAR, AGE. 16 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT R/O. C/O. ASHOK B. RAYANNAVAR, PLOT NO.4857/65/7TH CROSS 5TH MAIN, NEAR LAST BUS STOP SADASHIVA NAGAR BELAGAVI-590001. 3. ADVIK S/O SOMASHEKAR BHIMANNAVAR AGE. 11 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. C/O. ASHOK B. RAYANNAVAR, PLOT NO.4857/65/7TH CROSS V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.17 11:49:24 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2960 RPFC No. 100017 of 2024 5TH MAIN, NEAR LAST BUS STOP SADASHIVA NAGAR BELAGAVI-590001. RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GAURDIAN/ MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DEEPAK S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF COURT BELOW AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.02.2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BELAGAVI, IN CRL. MISC.NO.450/2017 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner herein challenging the order dated 14.02.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.450/2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi (for short “the Family Court”) granting maintenance to the respondent herein. 2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as per their rank before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that the marriage of petitioner No.1-wife with respondent-husband was solemnized - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2960 RPFC No. 100017 of 2024 on 20.06.2006 at Gandhi Bhavan, Belagavi and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 and 3 were born. It is further stated in the petition that the respondent-husband was suspecting the character of the petitioner No.1-wife and was not taking care of the petitioner No.1-wife. Accordingly, the petitioner No.1-wife left the matrimonial home and is residing separately from the respondent-husband. Hence, the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.450/2017 seeking maintenance. 3.1. After service of notice, the respondent-husband entered appearance and filed detailed objections denying the averments made in the petition. 3.2. It is the specific case of the respondent-husband that the petitioner No.1-wife is a graduate in Business Management and was working in Videocon Company and was getting a handful salary. It is also stated in the objection that the petitioners have left the matrimonial home without any cause. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 3.3. The Family Court, after considering the material on record, by its order dated 14.02.2023 granted monthly maintenance of Rs.8,000/- to petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,000/- - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2960 RPFC No. 100017 of 2024 each to petitioner N.2 and 3. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent-husband has filed this petition. 4. Heard Sri. Prakash Hosamane, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein (respondent-husband in Crl.Misc.450/2017). 5. It is the contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner No.1-wife herself has left the matrimonial home without any cause and presently the respondent-husband is not working and not secured any job. It is also contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband that the petitioner No.1-wife has completed her MBA and earlier she was working and therefore, she can be gainfully employed and accordingly, sought for interference by this Court in this petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein and taking into consideration the fact that the marriage between the petitioner No.1-wife and the respondent- husband was solemnized on 20.06.2006 at Belagavi and in their wedlock two children were born. Perusal of the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the parties - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2960 RPFC No. 100017 of 2024 are residing separately and in that view of the matter, taking into consideration that the petitioner No.1-wife is not working and she has to take care of her two minor children aged 9 years and 4 years, respectively, I do not find any merit in the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE YAN CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 14