- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 141 OF 2024 BETWEEN: NATESHAN SUNDAR S/O LATE M NATESHA MUDALIAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.168, 1ST FLOOR SEPPINGS ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR BENGALURU -560 001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G.BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. P.PADMINI PRIYA W/O NATESHAN SUNDER AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS NO.510, 5TH CROSS C WING, SKYLINE APARTMENTS CHANDRA LAYOUT BANGALORE -560 040 PRESENTLY R/AT FLAT NO.201, II FLOOR PLOT NO.571 DASHARATHA RESIDENCY RAILWAY HOUSE BUILDING CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED MALALTHALLI VILLAGE YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK -560 056 Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 2. BABY MEENA D/O NATESHAN SUNDAR AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS NO.510, 5TH CROSS C WING, SKYLINE APARTMENTS CHANDRA LAYOUT BANGALORE -560 040 PRESENTLY R/AT FLAT NO. 201 II FLOOR, PLOT NO.571 DASHARATHA RESIDENCY RAILWAY HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED MALALTHALLI VILLAGE YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK -560 056 3. SAI GANESH S/O NATESHAN SUNDAR AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS NO.510, 5TH CROSS C WING, SKYLINE APARMENTS CHANDRA LAYOUT BANGALORE -560 040 PRESENTLY R/AT FLAT NO.201 II FLOOR, PLOT NO.571 DASHARATHA RESIDENCY RAILWAY HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED MALALTHALLI VILLAGE YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK -560 056 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.NATESHAN MURTHY, ADVOCATE AND SRI.D.SUBRAMANI, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 THIS RPFC FILED U/S. 19(4) OF FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.09.2023 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.299/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/S.125(1)(a)(b) OF CR.P.C. FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 29.10.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CAV ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.299/2014 dated 27.09.2023 by the IV Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month from October 2018 till the date of order and Rs.5,000/- each to both the children from the date of petition till they attain majority and further, the Family Court had observed that the wife is entitled for monthly maintenance of an amount of Rs.25,000/- from the date of the order till her lifetime or till she remarries, the petitioner/husband is before this Court questioning the order. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the husband submits that when a petition is filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance, the wife has to state that she has no means to maintain herself. In this case, there is no such averment in the entire petition. It is submitted that she is running the family business and she is having sufficient income. The wife is a double graduate and in fact, the husband is not qualified and educated like her. In spite of being educated and qualified lady, she is not working and she is depending upon the husband. It is submitted that the facts that were stated by the wife before the Family Court, particularly, the fact that she is not earning is not a correct statement and she is not entitled for any maintenance. It is submitted that he has been complying with the orders passed in the Domestic Violence case and earlier orders that were passed. The children have attained majority and the Family Court had granted the maintenance only till they attain majority and the husband is not questioning - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 the same. As far as the wife is concerned, it is submitted that she is not entitled for maintenance. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband had relied on the judgment arising out of Criminal Revision Petition No.1324/2025 dated 19.06.2023, the judgments in case of Zubedabi Vs. Abdul Khader1, Chaturbuj Vs. Sita Bai2, Begum Subanu @ Saira Banu Vs. A.M. Abdul Gafoor3. Relying on these judgments, learned counsel for the husband submits that the wife is not entitled for maintenance as she has failed to aver in the petition that she is not able to maintain herself. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the wife submits that both the wife and husband had filed their respective statement of assets and liabilities. The Family Court, in detail had discussed about the properties which the husband is having and also about the income of the husband. It is submitted that though the wife is a double graduate, so far she is not working and she is not having any income. Though the children are 11978 CRI L J 1555 2 (2008) 2 SCC 316 3AIR 1987 SC 1103 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 major now, still they are not earning and it is the responsibility of the husband to maintain the children. It is submitted that the husband is not complying with the orders of the Family Court and there are arrears of maintenance. It is submitted that it is the responsibility of the husband to maintain the wife and the children and he cannot shy away from the responsibility. Just because the wife is educated, that itself cannot be a ground to absolve the husband from the liability of maintaining her. As the husband failed to fulfill his obligation, the wife is suffering. It is also submitted that the wife has to take care of the children along with her old age parents also and she requires to maintain herself. It is submitted that considering several aspects and appreciating the evidence on record, the Family Court had rightly granted the maintenance and there are no grounds to interfere. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. Before considering the respective contentions of the learned counsels for the petitioner/husband and respondent/wife, this Court deems it appropriate to peruse the order passed by the Family Court. In - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 the order, the Court had discussed about the order passed by the Family Court in the M.C. where it is observed that since 2013, the children are under the care and custody of the wife and she is looking after the expenses of the children. The Family Court, taking into consideration the expenses of both the parties, had held that the overall circumstances discloses that both the parties are having earning capacity. It is observed that the husband is earning by running glass and plywood industry and the wife being well qualified lady having passed her KAS examination, she is capable of paying the rent of Rs.12,000/- per month and maintenance charges of Rs.1,750/-. Further, it is observed that there is no evidence on record to make out that the wife was working at the time of disposal of M.C.No.2339/2014. So considering the said fact and pendente lite monthly maintenance of an amount of Rs.8,000/- was awarded. It is observed in the impugned order that the maintenance amount awarded in Crl.Misc.No.15/2013 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumkur in the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act proceedings was liable to be paid till October 2018 as their marriage is dissolved by decree of divorce on 23.10.2018. Even in the D.V. proceedings - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 also, maintenance of an amount of Rs.8,000/- per month was awarded. The Court had also observed that the husband is having several properties from which he is earning rental income. It is observed that the husband admitted that there is an order of the Court for depositing the rent amounting to Rs.1,09,80,000/- in connection to a particular property owned by the husband. The husband has accepted Ex.P3, a photograph with regard to the shop of the husband by name Nateshan Enterprises. He denied that the property measuring 7500 feet is divided among his three brothers. It is suggested that from 3 shop buildings and go-down and from his residential house, he is getting rental income of an amount of Rs.91,100/-. Considering the fact that the husband is having enough resources, properties and also business and the fact that the wife is not working had granted the maintenance of an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month from October 2018 till the date of order and Rs.5,000/- each to the children from the date of petition till they attain majority and further, monthly maintenance of an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the wife from the date of order till her life time or till she remarries. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 7. The undisputed facts in this case are that the wife is more qualified than the husband, the husband is having several properties and he is earning sufficiently. The contention of the husband is that the wife has not pleaded that she is not able to support herself in the petition and he relied on certain judgments. The wife had filed the statement of assets and liabilities before the Family Court, wherein she has stated that she has no income. The facts are very clear and the finding of the Family Court in the earlier litigation, in the M.C. proceedings is that she is not earning and she is not doing any work. In those circumstances, on a technicality that she has not stated that she is not having the income to maintain herself cannot be a ground for this Court to disentitle the wife from claiming maintenance. The judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot apply to the facts and circumstances of this case. 8. Then coming to the maintenance that is awarded, as far as children are concerned they became majors and the husband is also not aggrieved by such order. Hence, this Court is not going to that aspect. As per the order passed by the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 Family Court, if the maintenance is not paid by the husband, till the children have attained majority, it is left open to the wife to recover the same by filing execution petition. Then coming to the entitlement of the wife, no doubt it is the responsibility of the husband to maintain the wife and the children. In this case, when the wife is a double graduate, as it was observed in the M.C. proceedings also, there is no reasonable explanation forthcoming as to why she is not working. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the wife that she has to take care of her parents. If she has to take care of the parents, it is not the responsibility of the husband. Considering the fact that she is not earning, the Family Court had granted the maintenance. As far as that order is concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere. However, eternally the wife cannot depend upon the husband when she is capable of earning. The divorce is granted in the year 2018. Even after seven years also, the wife is taking the same stand that she is not working and the same cannot be appreciated. The purport of granting maintenance is to take care of the needs of the wife and children and to support them, but not to keep the other party idle. It is not the case that children are small and in spite of the - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 her best efforts, she is not able to secure the job and in the considered opinion of this Court, that is not the purport of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. A qualified wife shall make her best efforts to secure job. 9. In the light of the above discussions, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. This Court do not find any reasons to interfere with the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.299/2014 dated 27.09.2023 by the IV Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru. ii. The respondent No.1/wife shall make her best efforts to secure a job within one year from the date of receipt of copy of the order. iii. The petitioner/husband is at liberty to file a petition before the Family Court seeking modification of the order after one year from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and by that time, the respondent No.1/wife shall place before the Family Court what are all the efforts that are made by the wife to secure a job and based on that, the Family Court can pass appropriate orders. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53399 RPFC No. 141 of 2024 iv. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of. v. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2