- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4981 RPFC No. 100194 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100194 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SRI. PRAVIN S/O. VIJAY PAWAR, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, R/O. MAJISA PLYWOOD, AUTO NAGAR (RENUKA NAGAR), BELAGAVI-590016. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.S. BAWAKHAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RITIKA WIFE OF PRAVEEN PAWAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE SERVICE, RESIDENT OF SWAMY NAGAR, MACHHE, TALUK AND DISTRICT: BELGAUM. 2. KUMAR ARNAV SON OF PRAVEEN PAWAR, AGE: 9 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT, RESIDENT OF SWAMY NAGAR, MACHHE, TALUK AND DISTRICT: BELGAUM. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.04.2024 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT BELAGAVI IN CRI MISC.NO.59/2022 AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4981 RPFC No. 100194 of 2024 ORAL ORDER This petition is field by the respondent assailing the order dated 22.04.2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.59/2022 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’), granting maintenance to the respondents 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 petitioners that, the marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 16.04.2012 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is the grievance of the petitioners that, the respondent was not taking care of the basic necessities of the petitioners and also stated in the petition that, no separate house was made for the well being of the petitioners. So also it is contended that, the respondent was addicted to bad habits. Hence, the petitioners left the matrimonial home as the respondent was physically assaulting the petitioner No.1 and as such, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4981 RPFC No. 100194 of 2024 residing with her parents. Hence, the petitioners have filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.59/2022 seeking maintenance. 4. After service of notice, the respondent-husband entered appearance and filed statement of objection contending that, he has not neglected the petitioners and also makes all arrangements for well being of the petitioners. It is also stated in the statement of objection that, the petitioner No.1 has failed to fulfil the conjugal rights and further, the petitioner No.1 is having adamant behaviour and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record by its order dated 22.04.2024 granted maintenance of Rs.9,000/- per month to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.3,000/- per month to the petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent-husband has preferred this petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4981 RPFC No. 100194 of 2024 6. I have heard Sri. S. S. Bawakhan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Sangram S. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 7. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, the respondent No.1 herein has wilfully deserted the petitioner and also the respondent No.1 is working in Jnana Probodhan Mandir School at Belagavi, and therefore, award of maintenance requires to be interference. 8. Per contra, Sri. Sangram S. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband invited the attention of this Court to the finding recorded by the Family Court and submitted that, the respondent No.1 is working in the school and getting salary of Rs.7,000/- per month which is on the meagre side to lead life at Belagavi city and accordingly, sought to justify the impugned order. 9. Taking into consideration the finding recorded by the Family Court as the marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4981 RPFC No. 100194 of 2024 16.04.2012 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is also to be noted that, the parties are residing separately. The Family Court after considering the evidence of RW1 wherein, it is deposed by the respondent – husband that he is earning around 30 to 40 thousand per month and therefore, in order to maintain the status of petitioner No.1 with the status of respondent – husband has awarded maintenance to the petitioner No.1. 10. In that view of the matter, I do not find any material irregularity in the order passed by the Family Court. 11. Accordingly, petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SMM CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10