- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4290 RPFC No. 100063 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100063 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SHRI MRUTYUNJAYA S/O. SHIVANAND KERIMATTIHALLI @ BHAJANTRI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK (COOLIE), R/O. KERIMATTIHALLI, TQ AND DIST: HAVERI-581110. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.M. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. JYOTI D/O. NAGAPPA HARIJAN, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. KERIMATTIHALLI, TQ AND DIST: HAVERI, NOW RESIDING AT C/O. SMT. LAXMAVVA W/O. PRAKASH KADEMANI, R/O. AGADI, HARIJANARA ONI, TQ AND DIST: HAVERI-581128. 2. KUMARI EKAKSHA D/O. MRUTYUNJAYA KERIMATTIHALLI @ BHAJANTRI, AGE: 05 YEARS, OCC: BABY SITTING, R/O. KERIMATTIHALLI, TQ AND DIST: HAVERI, NOW RESIDING AT C/O. SMT. LAXMAVVA W/O. PRAKASH KADEMANI, R/O. AGADI, DIST: HAVERI-581128, RESPONDENT NO.2 BEING MINOR R/BY HER MOTHER (I.E RESPONDENT NO.1) SMT. JYOTI D/O. NAGAPPA HARIJAN. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.M. PATIL, ADVOCATE) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4290 RPFC No. 100063 of 2024 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE REVISION PETITION SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2024 IN CRL.MISC. NO. 24/2023 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT, HAVERI IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the respondent – husband in Crl.Misc.No.24/2023 challenging the order dated 19.03.2024 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Haveri1 granting maintenance to the petitioners therein. 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 petitioner before the Family Court that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 04.02.2018 and in their wedlock, petitioner No.2 is born. It is the case of petitioner that, in view of incompatibility of the relationship between 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4290 RPFC No. 100063 of 2024 the parties and also respondent – husband was insulting petitioner No.1 that she belongs to low caste and also pressurizing petitioner No.1 to give divorce and accordingly petitioners have left the matrimonial home and residing separately from the respondent - husband. It is also stated in the petition that M.C.No.186/2020 was filed under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act as the respondent has given life threat to the petitioners. It is also stated that the respondent has obtained decree of divorce by leaving petitioners in Haveri town and accordingly the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.24/2023 seeking maintenance. 4. On service of notice, the respondent – husband appeared before the Family Court and filed detailed statement of objection and submitted that petitioner No.1 by voluntarily agreed for dissolution of marriage and accordingly filed M.C.No.186/2020 before the competent Court. It is also stated in the statement of objection that petitioner No.1 stated that she will not claim maintenance - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4290 RPFC No. 100063 of 2024 against the respondent and accordingly sought for interference of this Court. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 19.03.2024, allowed the petition in part and directed the respondent – husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to petitioner No.1 and monthly maintenance of Rs.2,000/- to petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this petition. 6. I have heard Sri.B.M.Patil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.M.M.Patil, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to order dated 10.12.2020 in M.C.No.186/2020 and submitted that petitioner No.1 – wife has clearly stated that she will not claim maintenance against the respondent – husband herein and therefore - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4290 RPFC No. 100063 of 2024 the award of maintenance by the Family Court requires to be interfered with by this Court. 8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order. 9. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 04.02.2018 and in their wedlock, petitioner No.2 is born. I have carefully examined the order dated 10.12.2020 in M.C.No.186/2020 filed under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of marriage and in the said petition it is stated that petitioner No.1 – wife shall have no claim against petitioner No.2, however, taking into consideration the averments made in the claim petition that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have become destitute on account of leaving them by respondent – husband and also taking into consideration the allegation made in the claim petition by the petitioners that petitioner No.1 has been constrained - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4290 RPFC No. 100063 of 2024 to accept the petition filed under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act in M.C.No.186/2020 under force and compulsion, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents herein and accordingly no interference is called for in this petition as the petitioners are residing at Haveri Town and therefore require maintenance for their livelihood. 10. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SH CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 14