- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5397 RPFC No. 100012 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100012 OF 2023 (-) BETWEEN: SRI. RITESHKUMAR S/O. MALLIKARJUN AILI, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS AND PRIVATE WORK, R/O. IN FRONT OF RAMDEVAR TEMPLE, GOVERNMENT GIRLS HOSTEL, 2ND CROSS, JANTKAL ROAD, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.V. PATTAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. UMA W/O. RITESHKUMAR AILI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GANGAVATI, NOW RESIDING AT MALLARAYAN KATTI ONI, TQ: BETGERI AND DIST: GADAG-582101. 2. DHRUVIT S/O. RITESHKUMAR ALI, AGE: 03 YEARS 10 MONTHS, OCC: NIL, R/O. MALLARAYAN KATTI ONI, TQ: BETGERI AND DIST: GADAG-582101. (NOTE: SINCE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER GUARDIAN I.E. RESPONDENT NO.1) …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KAVYA C. SHETTAR, ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2023 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT GADAG, IN CRL. MISC NO.185/2021 AND DISMISS THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 125 OF CR.P.C. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5397 RPFC No. 100012 of 2023 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the respondent-husband in Crl.Misc.No.185/2021 challenging the order dated 20.01.2023 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court at Gadag (for short “the Family Court”) granting maintenance to the petitioners therein. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioners in Crl.Misc.No.185/2021 that the marriage of petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 13.05.2019 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 was born. It is the case of the petitioner No.1-wife that the respondent-husband was ill- treating the petitioners and also not providing basic necessity for the family and therefore, the petitioners have left the matrimonial home and residing separately and as such, the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5397 RPFC No. 100012 of 2023 petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.185/2021 before the Family Court seeking maintenance. 3.1. After service of notice, the respondent-husband entered appearance and filed detailed objections denying the averments made in the petition. It is the specific contention of the respondent-husband that the petitioners left the matrimonial home without any cause and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 3.2. The Family court, after consideration the material on record, by its order dated 20.01.2023 directed the respondent-husband to pay monthly maintenance of ₹10,000/- to petitioner No.1 and ₹5,000/- to petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent-husband has filed this petition. 4. I have heard Sri.D.V.Pattar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband and Sri.Kavya C Shettar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner No.1-wife. 5. Sri.D.V.Pattar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband has contended that the Family Court has failed to consider the fact that the respondent-husband is - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5397 RPFC No. 100012 of 2023 working in a private bank and his salary is only ₹4,000/- per month and therefore, the grant of maintenance by the Family Court is on the higher side, which requires to be interfered with by this Court in this petition. 6. Per contra, Smt.Kavya C Shettar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner No.1-wife sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Family Court. 7. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the marriage of the petitioner No.1-wife and the respondent- husband was solemnized on 13.05.2019 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 was born. It is also the case of the petitioner No.1-wife that on account of assault made by the respondent- husband on one occasion, the petitioner No.1-wife was injured. It is also to be noted here that the parties are residing separately. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner No.1-wife has to take care of petitioner No.2-child, who is two years old and therefore, the award of maintenance by the Family Court is just and proper. Though the learned counsel for the respondent-husband has stated that the salary of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5397 RPFC No. 100012 of 2023 respondent-husband is only ₹4,000/- per month, however, it is admitted by the respondent-husband in his evidence before the Family Court that he owns a car bearing number KA-01/MN- 4223. In that view of the matter, the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent-husband cannot be accepted and no interference is called for in this petition. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. 8. In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory, applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE YAN CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13