- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2468 WP No. 105528 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 105528 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: MURALIDHAR S/O TIRUMALRAO ILLAL AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: LIC EMPLOYEE, R/O: LIC QUARTERS, BADAMI, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A NEELOPANT, ADV) AND: SMT. VEENA W/O MURALIDHAR ILLAL AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: CTS NO.4745/H/4, LIC COLONY, JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:14.08.2018 PASSED IN EP NO.49/2013 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMAKHANDI AS PER ANNEXURE-A. AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:14.08.2018 PASSED IN EP NO.167/2010 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMAKHANDI AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND ISSUE DIRECTION TO THE TRIAL COURT IN EP NO.167/2010 AND E.P.NO.49/2013 TO CLUB BOTH EXECUTON PETITIONS AND TO CALCULATE THE ARREARS OF MAINTENANCE TO BE PAD BY THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE AMOUNT OF MAINTENANCE ALREADY PAID BY THE PETITIONER IN EXCESS. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.02.21 12:33:04 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2468 WP No. 105528 of 2018 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRL. HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This writ petition is filed, challenging the order dated 14.08.2018 passed in E.P.No.49/2013 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Jamakhandi, and the order dated 14.8.2018 passed in E.P.No.167/2010 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Jamakhandi. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows : The petitioner filed a petition for a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the respondent in M.C.No.33/2002. During the pendency of the present petition, the respondent filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking an interim maintenance. The trial Court allowed the application and granted an interim maintenance of Rs.1,250/- p.m. The said matrimonial case came to be dismissed by the trial Court vide judgment dated 27.6.2018. The respondent-wife initiated - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2468 WP No. 105528 of 2018 criminal proceedings against the petitioner under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code which ended in acquittal. The respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.47/2005 against the petitioner on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge, (Sr.Dn.) Jamakhandi seeking maintenance of Rs.6,000/- from the petitioner. The said suit was partially decreed vide judgment dated 20.12.2008 and granted a maintenance amount of Rs.3,000/- p.m. The Respondent filed an execution petition in E.P.No.167/2010 seeking enforcement of the decree passed in O.S.No.47/2005. In the said execution, both the petitioner and respondent filed a memo of calculation describing the amount of maintenance paid. The respondent filed another execution petition in E.P.No.49/2013 seeking arrears of maintenance from 1.11.2010 to 1.3.2013. The petitioner filed objections contending that, the respondent has wrongly calculated the arrears of maintenance without deducting the excess maintenance paid by the petitioner in parallel proceedings initiated by the respondent in E.P.No.14/2009, 167/2010 and M.C.No.33/2002. The trial Court, after hearing both sides, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2468 WP No. 105528 of 2018 passed the impugned order. The petitioner aggrieved by the same, has filed this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioner, and the respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the trial Court committed an error in passing the impugned orders. He submits that, the amount paid by the petitioner in the parallel proceedings initiated by the respondent-wife, ought to have been considered, while calculating the arrears of maintenance due. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition. 5. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. It is not in dispute that, the petitioner filed a petition for divorce in M.C.No.33/2002. In the said petition, the respondent filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking an interim maintenance of Rs.1,500/-. The said application was allowed, and the trial Court granted interim maintenance Rs.1,250/- p.m. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2468 WP No. 105528 of 2018 Subsequently, the respondent filed a suit against the petitioner for maintenance in O.S.No.47/2005. The said suit was partially decreed and granted maintenance of Rs.3,000/- p.m. The respondent filed an execution petition in E.P.No.167/2010 seeking for enforcement of order of an maintenance granted in O.S.No.47/2005. The trial Court while decreeing the suit in O.S.No.47/2005 observed that, if any maintenance amount was paid in other proceedings, the same has to be taken note of. The respondent claimed the maintenance during the pendency of the divorce petition. After deducting the interim maintenance, the respondent was entitled to the claim of Rs.1,750/-. The petitioner contended that, he had already paid the total claim and Rs.4,832/- in excess. From the perusal of the judgment passed in O.S.No.47/2005, there is no specific order to deduct the said maintenance amount awarded in the other proceedings. 7. The trial Court, taking note of the orders/judgment passed in the proceedings, has observed that, the respondent has not received any amount from the petitioner after 23.10.2010, and the respondent is entitled to receive the balance amount of Rs.63,310/- in E.P.No.49/2013 and further, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2468 WP No. 105528 of 2018 the Executing Court in E.P.No.167/2010, has reiterated the order passed in E.P.No.49/2013 dated 14.8.2018, and held that, the petitioner is liable to pay the amount of Rs.26,418/-. The Executing Court, considering the material placed on record, has rightly passed the impugned orders. Hence, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the impugned orders. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following : ORDER The writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE rs/CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5