- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 25302 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: VEDIKA GOENKA WIFE OF ANAND GOENKA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.642, EMBASSY PRISTINE APARTMENT IBLUR VILLAGE, BELLANDUR, BENGALURU-560102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUN GOVINDRAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: ANAND GOENKA SON OF VISHNU HARI GOENKA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT SHANTI KUTIR 25/1, 7TH CROSS, 19TH MAIN, J.P. NAGAR 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU-560078. ALSO AT SHRAVANTI RESIDENCY, APARTMENT NO. 206, 2ND FLOOR, NO. 605/1, 2 AND 16 KHATA NO. 865/3, 4TH A CROSS, OPPOSITE USHA ARMOUR PVT. LTD N.S. PALYA, BENGALURU-560078 …RESPONDENT (BY MS. SHIPRA DAS FOR C/R (CP NO.17124/25) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 02.08.2025 MADE IN MC NO.990/2023 C/W MC.NO.1487/2023 BY THE VI ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT BANGALORE, ON IA NO. II AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW IA NO.II (ANNEXURE-A) AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY THE ENTIRE EDUCATION EXPENSES OF BOTH THE CHILDREN AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY A SUM OF RS. 1,50,000/- P. M APART FROM EDUCATION EXPENSES PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.II in MC.No.990/2023 clubbed with MC.No.1487/2023 dated 02.08.2025 whereby the Family Court granted maintenance to the daughter and denied to the son and the wife. They are before this Court. 2. The wife had filed MC.No.990/2023 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. Husband has filed MC.No.1487/2023 seeking divorce on the ground of adultery. The husband has filed G & WC No.18/2023 seeking custody of both the son and the daughter. 3. Earlier certain orders were passed by the Family Court in G & WC.No.18/2023. As per the order dated 03.01.2024, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 the learned judge has interacted with the children in the absence of parents and advocates. Both the son and daughter are residing with the mother. They have no problem to meet the father and spend quality time with him, but they want to continue to stay with the mother. The Family Court also observed that the father is ready to bear the expenses of his children and also reimburse the school fees paid by the mother. As per the order dated 01.03.2024, the Family Court has observed that the advocate for the petitioner/father submitted that his client will pay the school fees and also arrears within 2 weeks. 4. In the earlier round of litigation, the WP No.11119/2025 has come up before this Court where the mother is before the Court questioning the order passed in the G & WC.No.18/2023 dated 01.03.2025. This Court has disposed of the same on 29.04.2025 as per the following: ORDER i. During the vacation, the father can pick up the daughter and son on Saturdays and Sundays. Whenever the exams are on Monday for the daughter, the father shall not exercise the visitation on Saturdays and Sundays. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 ii. The Father can pick up the children from the Mother's place and drop them back. iii. After the vacation, the arrangements made by the Family Court will come into effect and visitation shall go on as per the said arrangement. iv. The Family Court shall dispose of the I.A filed in M.C.No.990/2023 seeking maintenance within a period of one month from 02.06.2025. v. After the application of interim maintenance is considered in M.C.No.990/2023, the Father or the Mother is at liberty to seek modification of the order or visitation passed by the Family Court, Bengaluru. vi. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed off. 5. After the order passed by this Court, the Family Court had passed an order impugned whereby the maintenance is denied to the son and the wife. The Reasons that are given by the Family Court for denying the maintenance to both the wife and the son are that the husband has raised serious allegations that wife is living in adultery. According to him, he is not the biological father to the boy and the wife is living in adultery. Along with this petition he has filed 3 lab reports to show that he is not the biological father amongst the other medical documents. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 6. The Family Court has observed that when the father is raising the serious issue of adultery and that he is not the biological father to the son, the Family Court at this stage cannot grant maintenance to the wife and the child and accordingly, ordered the father to pay the educational expenses of his daughter from the present academic year 2025-26 and maintenance from the date of 01.03.2025. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/mother submits the when an I.A is filed seeking interim maintenance and basing on the allegations that were made by the father the Family Court cannot deny interim maintenance to the wife. It is submitted that the purpose of granting interim maintenance is to take care of the needs of the parties during the interregnum period. If in every case, basing on any allegations made if the Family Court denies maintenance to the wife, it goes contrary to Section 24 of the Hindu marriage Act. It is submitted that the Father is seeking custody of the child. He wants visitation of the child. But when it comes to the maintenance, on the ground that he is not the biological father and the wife is living in adultery, the maintenance cannot be - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 denied to the child. It is submitted that the order impugned passed by the Family Court is contrary to the settled legal position. The wife and the son are entitled for maintenance. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/father submits that all the documents i.e., the statement of assets and liabilities and all the relevant documents are not placed before the Court. It is submitted that all the reports show that he is not the biological father of the boy. It is submitted that though the MC is filed in the year 2023, after repeated directions by the Family Court, the Statement of Assets and Liabilities were filed on 01.03.2025. As such, the Family Court had directed the father to pay maintenance from 01.03.2025. It is submitted that as he was not aware of the fact that the wife is living in adultery and he was taking care of the child right from 2013 to 2022. He has love and affection towards the child. As such, he has sought for custody and visitation rights of the children. It is submitted that the children are very affectionate towards the father. Further, when there are grave allegations of adultery and in the light of the several documents that are placed, the Family Court has rightly held that the wife - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 is not entitled for maintenance. She relied on the judgment in the case of AMARJIT KAUR VS HARBHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER1. She relied on paragraph 8 of the judgment which reads as under: "8. Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 empowers the court in any proceeding under the Act, if it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of any one of them order the other party to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding and monthly maintenance as may seem to be reasonable during the proceeding, having regard to also the income of both the petitioner and the respondent. Once the High Court, in this case, has come to the conclusion that the wife - appellant herein has to be provided with the litigation expenses and monthly maintenance, it is beyond comprehension as to how, de hors the criteria laid down in the statutory provision itself, the court could have thought of imposing an extraneous condition, with a default clause which is likely to defeat the very claim which has been sustained by the court itself. Consideration as to the ultimate outcome of the main proceeding after regular trial would be wholly alien to assess the need or necessity for awarding interim maintenance, as long as the marriage, the dissolution of which has been sought, cannot be disputed, and the marital relationship of husband and wife subsisted. As noticed earlier, the relevant statutory consideration being only that either of the party, who was the petitioner in the application under Section 24 of the Act, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support, for the grant of interim maintenance, the same has to be 1 2003 (10)SCC 228 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 granted and the discretion thereafter left with the court, in our view, is only with reference to reasonableness of the amount that could be awarded and not to impose any condition, which has self-defeating consequence. Therefore, we are unable to approve of the course adopted by the learned single judge, in this case" 9. The father is also present before this Court and in his presence the submission is made by the learned counsel appearing for the father that he is not going away from the responsibility of maintaining the child i.e. the boy. He is only against granting of maintenance to the wife. Several judgments are placed before this Court to substantiate her contention that when there are serious allegations of adultery, then the wife is not entitled for maintenance. It is also submitted that the Family Court has passed a reasoned order and no interference. 10. Learned counsel for the husband had relied on the following judgments: 1. Dr. E. Shanthi v. Dr. H.K. Vasudev, ILR 2005 Kar 4981 2. Chetram Mali v. Karishma Saini 2023 SCC Online Del 7318 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 3. Anju Dahiya v. Rinku Dahiya. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 78/2023 & 163/2023 4. A.S. v. D.S. 2023 SCC Online Del 5689 5. Rupali Gupta v. Rajat Gupta, 6. Shanthakumari v. Thimmegowda [CH. Rev. No. 56 of 2016] 7. Perumal V. Saraswathi CMA.3126/2019./ (2021) 3 MLJ 82 8. Sanjay Bhardwaj & Ors. v. State & Anr., (2010) 118 DRJ 385 9. Padmja Sharma v. Ratan Lal Sharma, (2000) 4 SCC 266 10. Niraj Kathuria v. State of Jharkhand & Ors., 2023 SCC Online Jhar 1540 11. Pradip Buragohain v. Pranati Phukan, (2010) 11 SCC 108 12. Rama paswan v. State of Jharkhand, (2007) 11 SCC 191 13. Samit Kapoor v. Punam Kapoor, 2021 SCC OnLine cal 2095 14. MCD V. State of Delhi, (2005) 4 SCC 605 15. Κ.Ν. v. RG, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 7704 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 16. Mamta Jaiswal v. Rajesh Jaiswal, 2000 SCC OnLine MP. 580 11. Learned counsel appearing for the wife seeking maintenance had relied on the following judgments: 1. Bijal w/o Parag Vs. Parag, 1999 (2) Mh.L.J. 276 2. Goutam Kundu Vs. State of West Bengal and Another, 1993 (3) SCC 418 3. Amarjit Kaur Vs. Harbhajan Singh and Another, 2003 (10) SCC 228 4. Ajay Kumar Vs. Uma, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 148 5. Pradeep Kumar Sharma Vs. Deepika Sharma, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 1035 6. Ivan Rathinam Vs. Milan Joseph, 2025 SCC OnLine 175 12. Having heard learned counsels on either side, perused the materials on record. First, coming to the aspect where there are allegations of adultery and basing on that, when the husband files a M.C for divorce whether the wife is entitled for interim maintenance? At the stage of interim application, the allegations with regard to the adultery cannot be decided by the Court, as it requires evidence and that is the whole basis for granting divorce. In this case, he is relying on - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 certain reports and the reports itself contains that the origin of the samples are not confirming the same as the same were not done with any order of the Family Court. As such, those documents cannot be taken into consideration at this stage and the Court cannot go into the allegations of adultery at this stage and the Court cannot deny maintenance to the wife. 13. This Court has discussed about the order that is passed by the Family Court on the submission made by the Counsel that he is ready to take care of the maintenance of the children. The Court ought not to have denied maintenance to the child and the entitlement of the wife's maintenance also ought to have been considered by the Family Court. At this stage, this Court is not in a position to decide the same. As the Family Court has not discussed with regard to the Statement of Assets and Liabilities of the respective parties, but Family Court has gone more on the aspect of maintainability. As far as the son is concerned, already as per the order passed by the Family Court with regard to the daughter will also apply to the son. No doubt the Statement of Assets and Liabilities were filed on 01.03.2025. But in this case, the father has given an - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 undertaking before the court on 01.03.2024 that he is ready to bear the expenses of the children and also reimburse the school fees paid by the mother. As far as considering this undertaking given before the Family Court, the father is liable to pay the school fees/reimburse the school fees from 01.03.2024 and shall continue to pay and also the maintenance of the children shall be paid from 03.01.2024. 14. Then coming to the application of the wife seeking maintenance. As she has filed her Statement of Assets and Liabilities on 01.03.2025, whatever the amount that is going to be decided by the Family Court she is entitled from 01.03.2025 and the Family Court shall consider and pass appropriate orders. 15. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER 1. The order passed in I.A.No.II in MC.No.990/2023 c/w M.C.No.1487/2023 dated 02.08.2025 passed by the VI Additional Principal Family Court, Bengaluru is modified. Both the children are entitled for the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33458 WP No. 25302 of 2025 maintenance and educational expenses from the father from 03.01.2024. 2. As per the earlier order of the Court, if any amount is paid by the father the same shall be deducted and remaining amount shall be paid to the mother. 3. The wife is entitled for interim maintenance and with regard to her entitlement, the Family Court shall decide the same based on the Statement of Assets and Liabilities within a period of 1 month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 4. The wife's entitlement for maintenance is concerned as decided by the Family Court shall be from 01.03.2025. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. 6. All pending IA’s in the petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE RJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16