- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35224 WP No. 30611 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 30611 OF 2024 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SMT. SNEHA MERLYN LOUIS AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, W/O CHARLES BRYAN D/O SRI. LOUIS BONIFACE, RESIDING AT FLAT NO 496 10TH CROSS, BEML ROAD, KUNDANAHALLI GATE, BANGALORE-56066. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. REVATHY ADINATH NARDE., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI CHARLES BRYAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, SON OF SRI CHINNAPPAN V RESIDING AT NO. 175/A 18TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560102. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JOHN C., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 14.10.2024 PASSED BY THE HONBLE VI ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT BANGALORE IN G AND W NO. 403/2023 IN I.A.NO. 5 PRODUCED AS ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35224 WP No. 30611 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed on I.A.No.V in G & WC.No.403/2023 dated 14.10.2024 by the VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, whereby the Family Court had dismissed I.A.No.5 filed by the mother seeking interim maintenance for the child, the mother is before this court. 2. Both the parties are referred to as father and mother for the sake of convenience. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the mother submits that the grandfather has filed the G & WC representing the father. It is submitted that the father is residing in UK and earning sufficiently. The mother’s take home salary is Rs.75,000/- and she has to take care of the child who is 6 years old. When an application for maintenance is filed before the Court, the Family Court has failed to consider the same and the grounds on which it is dismissed is that there are other petitions pending and there the maintenance is sought and that can be considered in those petitions. It is submitted that, that cannot be the ground for the court to dismiss the petition. It is submitted that the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35224 WP No. 30611 of 2024 father has a responsibility to take care of the child and he has failed to contribute for the maintenance and welfare of the child. The Family Court ought to have decided the same and passed appropriate orders for the child’s maintenance. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/father submits that against the impugned order the petitioner/mother has to file a MFA, but not a writ petition. It is submitted that when an application is filed under Section 12 of the Guardianship and Wards Act, there cannot be an application seeking for maintenance and Court can only order interim custody of the child. It is submitted that on these counts the petition that is filed itself is not maintainable and considering the fact that the other petitions are pending, the family court had rightly dismissed the petition and there are no grounds to interfere. 5. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. The contention of the counsel for the respondent/husband have no legs to stand and against the impugned order that is passed by the Family Court, only a writ petition lies to this court, and hence the petition that is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35224 WP No. 30611 of 2024 filed is maintainable before this court. Then coming to the submission that in a petition that is filed under Section 12 of the G & WC Act, there cannot be interim maintenance it is a settled law that the Family Court has the jurisdiction to consider and grant the maintenance. Then coming to the impugned order the reason that is stated by the family court for dismissing the application as far as the child’s maintenance is concerned, it is contrary to law and to the facts. Just because the other petitions are pending and admittedly when no maintenance is awarded, the family court cannot dismiss the application on that ground. 6. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. The order passed on I.A.No.V in G&WC.No.403/ 2023 dated 14.10.2024 by VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Family Court for fresh consideration. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35224 WP No. 30611 of 2024 ii. Without further notice, the parties shall appear before the Family Court on 24.09.2025 and within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, the Family Court shall dispose of the I.A.No.5. iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. iv. All pending I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5