- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4208 RPFC No. 100069 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100069 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SAGAR T.U., AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: CIVIL ENGINEER, R/O. #195/26P, SIRI CHANDANA, 2ND MAIN, SWAMY VIVEKANANDA BADAWANE, DAVANAGERE SOUTHERN EXTENSION, DAVANGERE-577004. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISHWANATH S. BICHAGATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SMITHA W/O. SAGAR T.U., AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: BANK JOB, R/O. H.NO.70, KHB COLONY, SUBASNAGAR, KESHAWAPUR, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580023, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2. KUMARI JEEVA D/O. SAGAR T.U., AGE: 07 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. H.NO.70, KHB COLONY, SUBASNAGAR, KESHAWAPUR, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580023, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. (SINCE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR, REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN, MOTHER) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR & SMT. KAVYA C. SHETTAR, ADVOCATES) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05.10.2023 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI IN CRL.MISC.NO.137/2021 AND CONSEQUENTLY MAY REMAND THE MATTER TO THE HON’BLE TRIAL COURT FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 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:4208 RPFC No. 100069 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the respondent in Crl.Misc.No.137 of 2021 challenging the order dated 05.10.2023 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court Hubballi, granting maintenance to the petitioner No.2- child 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. It is the case of the petitioners that, marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 11.07.2016 at Davangere and in their wedlock petitioner No.2-daughter is born. It is stated that petitioner No.1 is working at State Bank of India. After the marriage, the family members of the respondent were ill-treating the petitioner-wife and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4208 RPFC No. 100069 of 2024 have not considered the needs of the petitioner No.1 and also the family members of the respondent were pressuring the petitioner No.1 to resign from the job as she is working at State bank of India. As such, the petitioner No.1 has left the matrimonial home and residing with her parents. As the respondent did not bother to take care of his wife and child, the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.137 of 2021 before the Family Court, seeking maintenance from the respondent-husband. 4. After service of notice, respondent entered appearance and denied the averments made in the claim petition. It is the case of the respondent that, the petitioner No.1 is adamant in character and was calling her mother regularly and used to talk with her mother hours together after such talk, the petitioner- wife was turning cruel towards respondent-husband and therefore, the respondent was fed up with the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4208 RPFC No. 100069 of 2024 behavior of the petitioner No.1. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 5. The Family Court, after considering the material on record by its order dated 05.10.2023 allowed the petition in part and awarded Rs.15,000/- per month to the petitioner No.2-child. Feeling aggrieved by the same, respondent-husband has preferred this petition. 6. I have heard Sri.Vishwanath S. Bichagatti, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.S.Shettar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 7. Sri. Vishwanath S. Bichagatti, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that respondent No.1-wife is working at Bangalore in a Bank and her mother is also residing with the respondents herein and respondent No.1 is capable to - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4208 RPFC No. 100069 of 2024 meet out the educational expenses required for the petitioner No.2-child and as such, Family Court, without considering the financial capacity of the petitioner herein, has awarded maintenance, which is on the higher side. Therefore, he sought for interference of this Court. 8. Sri. C. S. Shettar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Family Court. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the petition. 9. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, there is no dispute with regard to the relationship between the parties. The marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 11.07.2016 at Davangere and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. Perusal of the finding recorded by the Family - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4208 RPFC No. 100069 of 2024 Court would indicate that, the parties are residing separately. Taking into consideration the finding recorded by the Family Court at paragraphs 15 to 17, wherein, the petitioner herein is a Civil Engineer and working at SSR Survey Company, as he has admitted that, he is earning Rs.1,500/- per day, I am of the view that, maintenance awarded by the Family Court to the petitioner No.2 is fair and reasonable. In the result, Revision Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9