- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5180 RPFC No. 100039 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100039 OF 2023 (-) BETWEEN: PARASHURAM S/O. DURAGAPPA RATHOD, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O. KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA, HEBBAL, SADASHIV NAGAR, ARAMANE NAGAR, BENGALURU-560080. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. ASHWINI @ VIDHYA W/O. PARASHURAM RATHOD, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: PVT. JOB, R/O. PLOT NO.24, KALASAPUR ROAD, NANDISHWAR NAGAR, GADAG-582101, TQ AND DIST: GADAG. 2. YADUVEER S/O. PARASHURAM RATHOD, AGE: 4 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. PLOT NO.24, KALASAPUR ROAD, NANDISHWAR NAGAR, GADAG-582101, TQ AND DIST: GADAG. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY MINOR GUARDIAN AND NATURAL MOTHER SMT. ASHWINI @ VIDHYA W/O. PARASHURAM RATHOD, I.E. RESPONDENT NO.1. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-MINOR REP. BY R1) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT 1984, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 30.01.2023 PASSED IN CRL.MISC. NO.189/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL FAMILY COURT, AT GADAG, BY ALLOWING THE INSTANT PETITION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.03.25 16:02:34 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5180 RPFC No. 100039 of 2023 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the respondent challenging the Order dated 30.01.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.189/2019, on the file of Prl. Family Court at Gadag, granting maintenance to the respondent herein. 2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred with reference to their rank before the Family Court at Gadag. 3. It is the case of the petitioner before the Family Court that marriage between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent was solemnized on 17.05.2017 and in their wedlock, petitioner No.2 is born. 4. It is the case of the petitioner herein that respondent herein was not providing basic necessities to the petitioners and that apart, the respondent and his family members were harassing the petitioner No.1 to bring additional dowry and as such, petitioner No.1, unable to tolerate the inhuman treatment meted out to her and as such, left the matrimonial home and filed Crl.Misc.No.189/2019 before the Family Court, seeking - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5180 RPFC No. 100039 of 2023 grant of maintenance by the respondent. It is also forthcoming from the finding recorded by the Family Court, that petitioner No.1 has filed M.C.No.29/2019 seeking restitution of conjugal right which came to be allowed and therefore, it is the case of the petitioner No.1 that respondent/husband has neglected the petitioners and accordingly sought for maintenance from the respondent. 5. After service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed statement of objections denying the various allegations made against him and further made allegations against the petitioner No.1 including the allegation that petitioner No.1 used to remove her “mangalasutra” whenever she used to go out and further alleging that petitioner No.1 was having illicit relationship with another person and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 6. The Family Court, after considering the material on record, by its Order dated 30.01.2023, directed the respondent/husband to pay Rs.10,000/- to petitioner No.1 and Rs.5,000/- to petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, respondent/husband has presented this petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5180 RPFC No. 100039 of 2023 7. I have heard Sri. Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel for the petitioner/husband and Sri. C.S. Shettar, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/wife. Respondent No.2, being minor, is represented by respondent No.1. 8. Sri. Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner herein has no objection in so far as grant of maintenance to respondent No.2 child is concerned. However, he contended that, the respondent No.1 – wife is a B.E. Graduate and is working and therefore, grant of maintenance to the respondent No.1 herein requires to be interfered with in this petition. 9. Per contra, Sri. C.S. Shettar, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 herein submitted that, the respondent No.1 herein was working earlier and thereafter she has resigned from her job vide letter dated 27.06.2024 and therefore, he contended that, since the respondent No.1 herein is not working, she is entitled for maintenance from the petitioner herein. 10. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, it is not in dispute that marriage - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5180 RPFC No. 100039 of 2023 between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent was solemnized on 17.05.2017 and in their wedlock, petitioner No.2 is born. Taking into consideration the Order passed by the Family Court in M.C.No.29/2019, it can be safely held that the parties are residing separately. 11. Further, in so far as quantification of maintenance is concerned, it is not in dispute that respondent No.1 herein is a B.E. Graduate and was working at Hubballi. In this regard, on careful examination of the relieving letter dated 27.06.2024 made available by the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 herein, would indicate that respondent No.1 herein was working and resigned from her job as per letter dated 27.06.2024. 12. In the backdrop of the above aspects, it could be safely held that respondent No.1 herein was working till 27.06.2024 and said aspect of the matter was not countered by the learned counsel for the parties. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.1 herein (wife) is not entitled for maintenance till 27.06.2024 i.e. on the date she was relieved from job and therefore, respondent No.1/wife is hereby held - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5180 RPFC No. 100039 of 2023 entitled for maintenance from 1st July, 2024 onwards. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 30.01.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.189/2019, on the file of Prl. Family Court at Gadag, is hereby modified in so far as grant of maintenance to respondent No.1(wife) herein is concerned. However, no interference is called for in so far as award of maintenance to respondent No.2 herein is concerned and the same is kept intact. 13. It is also made clear that petitioner herein is working as a Teacher in Kendriya Vidyalaya and therefore, there could be no impediment for the petitioner herein to pay maintenance to the respondents herein. 14. The Revision Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE sac CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10