- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5299 RPFC No. 100113 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100113 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SHRI PRADEEP NARAYAN NAIK, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O. SHIRASI, TQ: SHJIRASI, NEHARU NAGAR, KARIGUNDI ROAD, SHIRASI, DIST: KARWAR – 581402. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. DEEPA W/O. PRADEEP NAIK, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. C/O. ANANT MADHAV PRABHU, 6TH CROSS, BHARATH NAGAR, RAYAT GALLI, VADAGAON, BELAGAVI – 590001. 2. KUMARI MANDIRA D/O. PRADEEP NAIK, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, OCC: NIL, SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY M/G AND MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1, SMT. DEEPA W/O. PRADEEP NAIK, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. C/O. ANANT MADHAV PRABHU, 6TH CROSS, BHARATH NAGAR, RAYAT GALLI, VADAGAON, BELAGAVI – 590001. …RESPONDENTS THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT 1984 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.02.2024 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, BELAGAVI, IN CRL.MISC.NO.64/2019 BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.03.25 16:02:36 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5299 RPFC No. 100113 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 29.02.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.64/2019 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi1 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 before the Family Court that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent was solemnized and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent and his family members were unhappy as girl child was born to them and accordingly, behaving indifferently with the petitioners and also not provided basic necessities and hence the petitioners have left the matrimonial home and residing with the parents of 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5299 RPFC No. 100113 of 2024 petitioner No.1. In order to maintain themselves, the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.64/2019 before the Family Court seeking maintenance from the respondent. 4. After service of notice, the respondent – husband entered appearance and filed detailed statement of objection contending that the petitioner No.1 was adamant and was not taking care of the respondent and his family members and refused to stay in the matrimonial home. It is also stated that the respondent has filed M.C.No.99/2019, which came to be decreed and despite the same, the petitioners are residing separately and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 29.02.2024, allowed the petition in part by directing the respondent – husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.8,000/- to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.6,000/- to petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5299 RPFC No. 100113 of 2024 6. I have heard Sri.S.G.Kadadakatti, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reasons assigned by the Family Court is without any justifiable on facts and further the petitioner had filed petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights which came to be allowed and despite the same, the respondents have not come forward to continue to live in the matrimonial home and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 8. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on careful examination of the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the marriage of the petitioner with husband was solemnized and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. Perusal of the finding recorded by the Family Court by referring to M.C.No.99/2019 makes it clear that the parties are residing separately. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5299 RPFC No. 100113 of 2024 9. Taking into consideration the livelihood of the respondents herein is concerned as they are residing at Belagavi city and further the petitioner No.2 is aged about 7 years old daughter, I am view of that the award of maintenance by the Family Court is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court 10. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6