- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4286 RPFC No. 100068 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100068 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: MAHABOOBSAB S/O. ABDULAZIZ BIJAPUR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: PAINTER, R/O. ISLAMPUR, 3RD CROSS, OLD HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580024. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUN L. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. YASMINBANU W/O. MAHABOOBSAB (YASEEN) BIJAPUR, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCCU: HOUSE HOLD, R/O. C/O. S.M. KRISHNA NAGAR, GADAG, TQ: DIST: GADAG-582101. 2. MOHAMMADSAKIB S/O. MAHABOOBSAB BIJAPUR, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCCU: NIL, R/O. C/O. S.M. KRISHNA NAGAR, GADAG, TQ: DIST: GADAG-582101. 3. KUMARI NASIM D/O. MAHABOOBSAB BIJAPUR, AGE: 13 YEARS, OCCU: NIL, R/O. C/O. S.M. KRISHNA NAGAR, GADAG, TQ: DIST: GADAG-582101. 4. KUMARI ARASIYA D/O. MAHABOOBSAB BIJAPUR, AGE: 10 YEARS, OCCU: NIL, R/O. C/O. S.M. KRISHNA NAGAR, GADAG, TQ: DIST: GADAG-582101. 5. KUMARI ARFA D/O. MAHABOOBSAB BIJAPUR, AGE: 6 YEARS, OCCU: NIL, R/O. C/O. S.M. KRISHNA NAGAR, GADAG, TQ: DIST: GADAG-582101. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.03.07 16:18:42 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4286 RPFC No. 100068 of 2024 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.09.2023 IN CRL.MISC.NO.210/2022 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT GADAG, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the respondent – husband in Crl.Misc.No.201/2022 challenging the order dated 07.09.2023 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag1 granting maintenance to the petitioners therein. 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 petitioners before the Family Court that the marriage between petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 12.11.2011 and in their wedlock petitioner Nos.2 to 5 were born. It is stated 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4286 RPFC No. 100068 of 2024 in the petition that, the respondent is a businessman running rolling shutters and also has steel furniture business. It is further stated in the petition that the respondent has not provided basic necessities to the petitioners and was assaulting petitioner No.1 and children. In that view of the matter, the petitioners have left the matrimonial home and accordingly filed Crl.Misc.No.210/2022 seeking maintenance. 4. After service of notice, the respondent – husband though served, remained absent and accordingly the respondent was placed ex-parte. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 07.09.2023 directed the respondent – husband to pay Rs.4,000/- per month to petitioner No.1 and Rs.2,000/- per month each to petitioner Nos.2 to 5. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has presented this petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4286 RPFC No. 100068 of 2024 6. I have heard Sri.Arun L Neelopant, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order impugned is ex-parte and no fair opportunity has been given 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 petitioner No.1 with the respondent – husband was solemnized on 12.11.2011 and in their wedlock four children were born namely petitioner Nos.2 to 5. Taking into consideration the fact that respondent – husband has deliberately avoided to appear before the Family Court to defeat the valuable rights of the petitioners and further as the respondent – husband is a businessman, I am of the view that the award of maintenance by the Family Court is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court taking into - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4286 RPFC No. 100068 of 2024 consideration that the petitioner No.- 1 wife has to look after four children. 9. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SH CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5