Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47963 (KAR)

SRI NAGESH G. GOUDA S/O GANAPAYA GOUDA v. SMT GEETA N. GOUDA W/O NAGESH G. GOUDA

WP/100436/2025 · 2025-02-10

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2609 WP No. 100436 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 100436 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI. NAGESH G. GOUDA S/O. GANAPAYA GOUDA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND BUSINESS, R/O: TARIBAGILU, DEVARMOTE, HONAVAR TALUK- 581334, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN PRABHAKAR TARIKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. GEETA N. GOUDA W/O. NAGESH G. GOUDA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: KAGAL, HINI, KUMTA TALUK- 581332, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ORDER DATED 16-02-2024 IN M.C.NO.23/2023 ON I.A.NO. 1 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND PRL.JMFC, KUMTA AT KUMTA, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT AT ANNEXURE-A & PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INCLUDING COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.18 11:21:51 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2609 WP No. 100436 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the order dated 16.02.2024, by which the wife is granted interim maintenance at ₹.5,000/-. 2. Heard the learned counsel Shri Praveen Prabhakar Tarikar appearing for the petitioner. 3. The petitioner is the husband and the respondent is the wife. They two get married on 24.02.2019. It transpires that the marriage between the two flounders and on floundering of the relationship, several proceedings are initiated, one such proceeding is M.C.No.23/2023 on I.A.No.1 seeking maintenance invoking Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The concerned Court answering the application awards interim maintenance at ₹.5,000/-. This has driven the husband to this Court in the subject petition. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2609 WP No. 100436 of 2025 4. Learned counsel Shri Praveen Prabhakar Tarikar appearing for the petitioner submits that, the wife has on her own volition deserted the husband and moved to her parental house and therefore the payment of maintenance is exempted as obtaining under sub-Section (4) of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. Learned counsel would submit that the maintenance that is awarded is on the higher side. Therefore, it should be tweaked or obliterated. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent seeks to submits that the wife did not move away from the house but it is the husband's torture that led her to move away from the house and therefore, sub-section (4) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. would not be applicable in the case at hand, nonetheless it is only an order of interim maintenance at ₹.5,000/-. 6. I have given my anxious considerations to the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the material on record. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2609 WP No. 100436 of 2025 7. The order that directs payment of maintenance at ₹.5,000/- is on recording cogent reasons as the petitioner is running a home stay and getting annual income of ₹.4,00,000/- and therefore, the amount i.e., ₹.5,000/- is not exorbitant for this Court to interfere in exercise of its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The other submission that, the wife has herself deserted her husband or the house and the payment of maintenance is exempted and sub-section (4) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is noted only to be rejected as the matter is at large before the concerned Court and it is for the concerned Court to take note of those submissions as well, in the light of the order not warranting any interference, the petition stands rejected. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KGK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 141