- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2942 RPFC No. 100039 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100039 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SHRI. RAVI S/O. APPAJI KALAL, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. GOVERNMENT SERVANT, R/O. HOSAPETE, HIREBAGEWADI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591109. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. IRANAGOUDA K. KABBUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SAVITA W/O. RAVI KALAL AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NEAR OLD BUS STOP, RADHAPUR PETH, RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001. 2. KUMARI. SRUSHTI D/O. RAVI KALAL, AGE. 17 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. NEAR OLD BUS STOP, RADHAPUR PETH, RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001 3. KUMAR. PRITHVI S/O. RAVI KALAL AGE. 14 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. NEAR OLD BUS STOP, RADHAPUR PETH, RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001. (SINCE THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 MINOR R/BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R. K. KULKARNI AND MISS. R.R. KULKARNI, ADVOCATES) V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.15 12:15:08 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2942 RPFC No. 100039 of 2024 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 13.02.2023, PASSED IN CRIL.MISC. NO.202/2019, BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BELAGAVI, IN PARTLY ALLOWING THE MAINTENANCE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN, IN PART DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO PAY THE MONTHLY MAINTENANCE OF RS.14,000/- TO THE RESPONDENTS (RS.8,000/- TO RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND RS.3,000/- EACH TO RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3), IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION 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 in Crl.Misc.No.202 of 2019 challenging the order dated 13.02.2023 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court Belagavi, granting maintenance to the petitioners therein. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this petition shall be referred to in terms of their status and ranking before the Family Court. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2942 RPFC No. 100039 of 2024 3. It is the case of the petitioners that, marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 24.11.2004 at Godachi, Ramadurga Taluk, and in their wedlock two children were born (petitioner Nos.2 and 3). It is the case of the petitioners that, the respondent-husband was not taking care of needs of the wife and children, and there is family rift between the parties and it is further stated in the petition that the respondent-husband was denying food and basic necessities to the petitioners and as such, the petitioner-wife left the matrimonial home along with the children and residing with her parents. Hence, petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.202 of 2019, on the file of Family Court, seeking maintenance from the respondent-husband. 4. After service of notice, respondent entered appearance and filed statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2942 RPFC No. 100039 of 2024 case of the respondent that the petitioner No.1 was arrogant and the petitioner No.1 is having extra martial affair. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 5. The Family Court, after considering the material on record by its order dated 13.02.2023 allowed the petition in part and awarded maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,000/- per month each to petitioner Nos.2 and 3. Feeling aggrieved by the same, respondent-husband has presented this Revision Petition. 6. I have heard Sri. Iranagouda K. Kabbur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. R.K.Kulkarni and K.R.Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2942 RPFC No. 100039 of 2024 7. Sri. Iranagouda K. Kabbur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the amount of maintenance awarded by the Family Court is on the higher side and reasons stated in the statement of objections is a cause for rift in the family and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 8. Sri. R.K. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the Family Court, after considering the material on record, arrived at a conclusion, which requires to be confirmed in this petition. 9. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the, parties, there is no dispute with regard to relationship between the parties. The marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 24.11.2004 and in their wedlock two children were born. It is also not in - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2942 RPFC No. 100039 of 2024 dispute that the both the petitioner No.1 and the respondent have made allegations against each other and further the petitioner is working at BSF. The Family Court after considering the material on record as per Ex.P2-Salary Slip, which shows that gross- salary of the petitioner herein is Rs.55,484/- per month and therefore, award of maintenance by the Family Court is just and proper, which does not call for interference in this petition. Accordingly, the Revision Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8