- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100039 OF 2018 (-) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. NIRMALA W/O MAHABALESHWARGOUDA PATIL, A/A: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK 2. KUMARI SUSMITA D/O MAHABALESHWARGOUDA PATIL, A/A: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. 3. KUMAR ABHISHEK S/O MAHABALESHWARGOUDA PATIL, A/A: 11 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, ALL ARE R/O: AMBEDKAR COLONY, ANAND NAAR, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580029. (PETITIONER NO.2 AND 3 BEING MINOR WERE REPRESENTED BY THE NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER, PETITIONER NO.3 BEING MINOR NOW IS REPRESENTED BY THE NATURAL GUARDIAN THE MOTHER, PETITIONER NO.1). …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S. S. NIRANJAN, ADVOCATE) V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.11 16:17:29 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 AND: MAHABALESHWARGOUDA S/O. DEMANGOUDA PATIL AGE: MAJOR, OCC: KLE SOCIETYS BASAVA INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS ATTENDER, R/O: BASAVA INTERNATINAL SCHOOL, DWARAKA, NEW DELHI, STATE: DELHI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.S. KARISHETTAR, ADVOCATE) ------- THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI IN CRL. MISC.NO.170/2015 AND TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER AND TO ENHANCE THE AWARDED MONTHLY MAINTENANCE OF RS.4,000/- TO EACH OF THE PETITIONERS I.E., PETITIONER NO.2 AND 3 FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE MARRIAGE OF PETITIONER NO.2 AND TILL THE PETITIONER NO.3 ATTAINS THE MAJORITY, TO MONTHLY MAINTENANCE OF RS.20,000/- TO ALL THE THREE PETITIONERS HEREIN AND MODIFY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.12.2017 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI IN CRL. MISC. NO.170/2015, FROM THE DATE OF PETITION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioners in Crl.Misc.No.170 of 2015, challenging the order dated 14.12.2017 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court Hubballi, rejecting the claim petition filed by the petitioner No.1 and allowing the petition insofar as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are concerned. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this petition shall be referred to in terms of their status and ranking before the Family Court. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 24.03.1995 at Jamalur as per Hindu Community. In their wedlock, two children were born namely, the petitioner Nos.2 and 3. It is the grievance - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 of the petitioners that, the respondent-husband was not taking care of needs of the petitioners and was ill- treating the petitioner-wife and as such, the petitioners left the matrimonial home and residing separately. Hence, the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.170 of 2015, on the file of Family Court, seeking maintenance from the respondent-husband. 5. After service of notice the respondent entered appearance and filed detailed statement of objections admitting the relationship, however, denied the averments made in the claim petition. It is the case of the respondent that the respondent is working in Kirloskar Company at Hubballi and the petitioners have left the matrimonial home without any cause and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 6. The Family court, after considering the material on record by its order dated 14.12.2017 rejected the claim petition of petitioner No.1 and allowed the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 petition insofar as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 is concerned. Hence, this petition is filed. 7. I have heard Sri.S.S.Niranjan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.K.S.Karishettar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 8. Sri. S.S.Niranjan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, the sole reason for which the Family court rejected the claim made by the petitioner-wife is that, petitioner-wife has left the matrimonial home without any cause and therefore, sought for interference of this court. He also contended that, petitioner No.3 has attained majority and petitioner No.2 is unmarried daughter and accordingly, sought for enhancement of maintenance. 9. Per contra, Sri. K.S. Karishettar learned counsel appearing for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Family court. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 10. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that marriage between the petitioner-wife with the respondent solemnized on 24.03.1995 and in their wedlock, two children were born. It is also not in dispute that the respondent-husband is working in Kirloskar Company at Hubballi. Taking into consideration the factual aspects on record, I am of the opinion that, the reasons assigned by the Family court in rejecting the claim made by the petitioner No.1 is incorrect as the petitioner No.1 has become destitute on account of separation from the respondent-husband in the family. In that view of the matter, I find force in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. However, insofar as the quantum of maintenance is concerned, sum of Rs.4,000/- is awarded to the petitioner No.2, which required to be enhanced by - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 taking into consideration the status of the parties, and therefore, the respondent-husband is directed to pay the maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month to the petitioner No.2 from the date of petition till the date of realization. It is stated that petitioner No.3 has attained majority and accordingly, no interference is called for in this petition. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) Petition allowed in part; ii) Order dated 14.12.2017 in Crl.Misc.No.170 of 2015 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi is set aside insofar as petitioner No.1 is concerned and the matter is remanded to the Family court for fresh consideration, after affording an opportunity to both the sides. iii) Award of maintenance for petitioner No.2, is enhanced from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.10,000/- per month. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2536 RPFC No. 100039 of 2018 iv) No interference is called for insofar as maintenance to petitioner No.3 is concerned. Petitioner No.3 is entitled for the maintenance from the respondent till he attains the age of majority. v) In order to avoid further delay in the matter, as the parties are represented through their counsel, the parties are directed to appear before the Family court on 27.02.2025 at 11 am. vi) Registry is directed to send back the records immediately. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27