- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1030 RPFC No. 100037 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100037 OF 2023 (-) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PRAMEELA ALIAS PREMA W/O. SUBHASGOUDA KENCHANAGOUDRA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. BISALAHALLI, BYADAGI TQ, NOW R/O. NEAR KARAJAGI RAILWAY STATION, HAVERI TQ. & HAVERI DISTRICT. 581101. 2. KUM. SHREYA D/O. SUBHASGOUDA KENCHANAGOUDRA, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER, 1ST REVISION PETITIONER, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. BISALAHALLI, BYADAGI TQ, NOW R/O. NEAR KARAJAGI RAILWAY STATION, HAVERI TQ. & HAVERI DISTRICT. 581101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H. R. GUNDAPPA AND SRI. C S ERESIMI, ADVOCATES) AND: SUBHASAGOUDA KENCHANAGOUDRA S/O. SHIVAPUTRAGOUDA KENCHANAGOUDRA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC. ASSISTANT TEACHER, GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL, R/O. KOLLAPURA 581110. MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Date: 2025.01.24 13:02:11 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1030 RPFC No. 100037 of 2023 BYADAGI TQ. HAVERI DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NAVEEN CHATRAD, ADVOCATE) ------- THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE ORDER OF MAINTENANCE DATED 03.11.2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT HAVERI, IN CRIMINAL MISC. NO.264/2020, AND TO GRANT THE REV. PETITIONER’S FROM RS.3,000/- TO RS. 25,000/- TO THE 1ST REV. PETITIONER AND RS.2,000 TO 20,000/- TO THE 2ND REV. PETITIONER, IN ALL RS.45,000/- PER MONTH. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This petition is preferred by the petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous No.264/2020, challenging the order dated 03.11.2020 passed by the Family Court, Haveri, (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’), seeking enhancement of maintenance. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 20.06.2005 at Karajagi village, Haveri taluk. In - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1030 RPFC No. 100037 of 2023 their wedlock petitioner No.2 was born. It is also stated in the petition that the respondent was working as Government School Teacher and was treating the petitioner inhumanly and as such the petitioners have left the matrimonial home and residing separately. Hence, the petitioners have filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.264/2020 seeking maintenance. 5. On service of notice, the respondent – husband entered appearance and filed detailed statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is a specific contention of the respondent - husband that he is physically disabled and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 6. The Family Court after considering the material on record by its order dated 03.11.2020 allowed the petition in part and directed the respondent - husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.2,000/- to the petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred this petition. 7. Heard Sri. H. R. Gundappa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. Naveen Chatrad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1030 RPFC No. 100037 of 2023 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the Family Court without assessing the basic aspects of the need of the petitioners has awarded meager maintenance which requires to be enhanced. Taking into account the immovable properties of the respondent-husband and also the pensionary benefits of the respondent as the respondent is retired as Government Teacher and as such sought for interference of this Court. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order and submitted that, the respondent is handicapped retired Government Teacher and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. 10. Having taken note of the submission made by learned counsel for the parties it is not in dispute with regard to the relationship between the parties. The respondent is a retired Assistant Master and as per his last pay on 18.04.2024 salary certificate produced before this Court by the respondent) was Rs.39,800/- per month and the pension has been fixed at Rs.17,247/- per month. It is also not in dispute that the respondent herein having joint family property at Bisalhalli village, Byadgi taluk (RTC extracts produced by the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1030 RPFC No. 100037 of 2023 petitioners). In that view of the matter, taking into account that the petitioners herein are residing separately with the respondent and the petitioner No.2 as to pursue her education and further she is unmarried and therefore, the quantum of maintenance awarded by the Family Court requires enhancement. 11. Taking into account the observation made above, I am of the view that, the respondent - husband is directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioners herein from the date of petition. Accordingly, order dated 03.11.2020 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.264/2020 is modified, as observed above, and petition is allowed in part. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SMM CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25