- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100053 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: FAKIRGOUDA A/F CHANDRASHEKHARGOUDA PATIL, AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. PVT. JOB, NOW R/O. WALIKAR ONI, KUNKUR-581212 TQ. KUNDAGOL, DIST. DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. REKHA W/O. FAKIRAGOUDA PATIL, AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O.C/O. KASHINATHAYYA C. HIREMATH, A/O. CHICHALI-582117, TQ. DIST. GADAG. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. V.G. BHAT, SRI. SURAJ M. KATAGI AND SRI. J.C. GANJIGATTI, ADVOCATES) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.03.2024 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO.10/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, GADAG, BY ALLOWING THE INSTANT PETITION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the respondent – husband challenging the order dated 04.03.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.10/2023 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Gadag1 granting maintenance to the respondent herein. 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 petitioner that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 27.11.2020. It is further stated in the petition that the parties have lead marital life for about six months and thereafter the respondent and his family members have demanded additional dowry from the petitioner - wife and her family and also the respondent was not taking care of the needs of the petitioner – wife and she was ill-treated 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 by the respondent and his family members and as such the petitioner has left the matrimonial home. 4. It is also forthcoming from the pleadings on record that the respondent has filed M.C.No.455/2022 on the file of the I Additional Family Court, Hubballi seeking dissolution of marriage and same is pending consideration before the Family Court. Hence, the petitioner has filed Crl.Misc.No.10/2023 seeking maintenance from the respondent – husband. 5. Upon service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed detailed objection stating that the petitioner was a adamant lady and was not co-operated for conjugal rights in the matrimonial home and also it is stated that the petitioner is working as teacher in Divya Chetan School, Neelagund and accordingly petition be dismissed on merits. 6. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 04.03.2024 allowed the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 petition in part and granted maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this revision petition. 7. I have heard Sri.Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.V.G.Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 8. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein that the Family Court has committed an error in not considering the fact that the respondent herein is working at Divya Chetan School, Neelagund, Gadag Taluk and is a earning member in the family and therefore, it is argued that, the respondent herein is not entitled for maintenance from the petitioner herein. 9. It is also contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the Family Court has committed an error in not considering the fact that the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 respondent herein was working as guest lecturer in above Institution and therefore sought for interference of this Court. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Delhi in MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.248/2019 and invited the attention of this Court to para No.13 and argued that as the respondent herein has not proved the income of the petitioner and therefore sought for interference of this Court. 11. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Family Court. 12. Having taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, on the last occasion, this Court vide order dated 14.02.2025 directed the Head of the Institution to file an affidavit as to whether the respondent herein is working as guest lecturer in their - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 Institution. Accordingly, the respondent herein has filed an affidavit of Sri.Ashok Chavan S/o Kubbu, Head Master of Divya Chetan English Medum School, Neelgund stating that the respondent herein was working earlier in the Institution as and when the service of the respondent is required to teach the students, as per request made by the Institution to the respondent herein for teaching. However, at para No.2, it is stated that the management of the Institution is not paying any remuneration or salary to the respondent herein. 13. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 27.11.2020 and in their wedlock no children were born and also taking into consideration that M.C.No.455/2022 is filed by the petitioner herein seeking dissolution of marriage against the respondent herein and as such it may safely be concluded that both petitioner and respondent are residing separately. In that view of the matter, taking into - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 consideration the fact as narrated by the Family Court placing reliance on Exs.P.2 to P.9, the petitioner is having immovable agricultural properties apart from growing commercial crops. 14. Though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of the High Court of Delhi, however taking into consideration the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shamima Farooqui vs. Shahidkhan reported in (2015) 5 SCC 705 wherein it is held that the remedy under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is to provide social justice and is specially enacted to protect women and children from preventing them from vagrancy and destitution. It is also to be noted that the petition before the Family Court is pending consideration relating to dissolution of marriage and therefore in view the finding recorded by the Family Court at para No.31, I do not find any merit in the petition. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3522 RPFC No. 100053 of 2024 15. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SH CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16