- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29128 WP No. 14744 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 14744 OF 2022 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT SHASHIKALA K.K., D/O K.H.KRISHNAIAH W/O D.N.MOHAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/A T V S LAYOUT BEHIND RAVIKIRAN APARTMENTS MYDALA ROAD, KYATASANDRA TUMAKURU TOWN-572 106 2. SMT PUSHPALATHA K.K.@ SUNITHA D/O K.H.KRISHNAIAH W/O SRINIVASA D.N., AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/A DIBBURU THOTA HANUMEGOWDANA PALYA TUMAKURU-572 106 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.SUNIL S. RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT CHOWDAMMA W/O K.H.KRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 2. SRI K.H.KRISHNAIAH S/O LATE YAJAMAN HANUMANTHARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS 3. SRI K.UMESH S/O K.H.KRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29128 WP No. 14744 of 2022 ALL ARE R/A NO.2108 SANTHEBEEDI, KYATASANDRA TUMAKURU TOWN-572 106 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.SURESHA, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED:04.05.2022 ONE PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, TUMAKURU ON I.A.NO.2 IN CRL.MISC.NO.206/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-F TO THE WP IN SO FAR AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.II in Crl.Misc.No.206/2021 dated 04.05.2022 by the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Tumakuru, whereby the Family Court had directed the son and two daughters to pay interim maintenance of an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month each to the parents, the petitioners/daughters are before this Court. 2. Before the Family Court, the father and mother are the petitioners, the son is the first respondent and the daughters are respondent Nos.2 and 3. The father and mother are aged about 85 years and 65 years respectively. It is their case that they are not in a position to maintain themselves as such, they - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29128 WP No. 14744 of 2022 have come before the Court seeking maintenance. It is also stated that the daughters have filed suit in O.S.No.61/2017 for partition and the said case is pending for adjudication. 3. It is the case of the daughters that they are married long back and the parents are staying with the son. They are having sufficient income from the rents of the building and the garden land. The parents are earning huge money everyday by giving treatment of Ayurvedic medicine and they are having sufficient income to maintain themselves and they are also receiving monthly pension. It is also stated that after the partition suit is filed, the present application is filed by the parents seeking maintenance only to harass the daughters. 4. The Family Court had considered the submissions of the parties and observed that the respondents therein being the children of the parents, it is their bounden duty to take care and maintain the aged parents. The daughters, in their objections, have asserted that their family is getting income of an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- per annum from areca crops. The Court gave a finding that the children are having sufficient - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29128 WP No. 14744 of 2022 means to pay interim maintenance to the parents and accordingly granted the maintenance. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/ daughters submits that the Family Court had failed to consider the statement of assets and liabilities and the financial status of the daughters. When the parents are staying together, there is no responsibility to the daughters to maintain the parents. It is submitted that they have already stated that from the agricultural land they are getting income of an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- per annum. The Family Court had not considered any of these aspects and granted the maintenance. In fact, in their objections, it is stated that if the parents are ready to come back, the daughters are ready to take care of them, provided that the share of the properties is given to them. It is submitted that the Court had failed to consider the facts of the present case and granted the maintenance. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the maintenance has to be granted to the parents, Section 125 of Cr.P.C. mandates that there should be proof that they are not in a position to maintain themselves. It is his contention that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29128 WP No. 14744 of 2022 when the petition is filed by the parents, the exercise has to be done with regard to whether they have the means to maintain themselves or not. 6. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, perused the entire material on record. Both the daughters want share in the property of the parents. When they want share in the family property, they are not stating whether the daughters have the right in the property of the parents. When it comes to the maintenance, according to the daughters, it is the responsibility of the son. The partition suit is filed and they are seeking partition of the properties and it is stated that the parents are not in a position to maintain themselves. The daughters cannot come before the Court and say that they have no obligation to maintain the parents. The father is aged about 85 years old. They do not want to pay an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month but they want the property of the parents which is worth lakhs of rupees. This Court is not able to appreciate any of the submissions that are made by the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29128 WP No. 14744 of 2022 petitioners. The Family Court had rightly observed that the children have bounden duty to maintain the parents and in the backdrop of the case where the daughters are seeking share in the property of the parents. This Court finds no reasons to interfere with the order passed by the Family Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12