- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27843 RPFC No. 291 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 291 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI.HANUMANTHAPPA S/O HALAPPA A.K., AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O A.K.COLONY, KUMBALURU VILLAGE, OPPOSITE OF K.E.B. THOTADA MANE, HARIHAR TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT – 577 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH R NELKUDURI, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. AKKAMMA @ AKKAMAHADEVI H., W/O HANUMANATHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE R/O 7TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS, P.J.EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE – 577 002 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MANJU S., ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 7.11.2023 PASSED IN CRI.MISC NO.32/2020 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF CR.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, 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:27843 RPFC No. 291 of 2023 ORAL ORDER The present RPFC is filed aggrieved by the orders passed in Crl.Misc.No.32/2020 dated 07.11.2023 passed by the Family Court, Davanagere whereby the family court had granted an amount of Rs.4,000/- per month to the wife as maintenance and also allowed the petition with cost of Rs.1,000/-. 2. Both the parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/husband submits that the wife has filed MC.No.125/2014 and she has withdrawn the same. According to the husband, the wife is earning and she is not entitled for maintenance and this fact is not considered by the court. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/wife submits that the petitioner is having the capacity to maintain the wife and she is not in a position to maintain herself. The family court has considered the fact that he has contested in the elections and there is a declaration. Considering all these, the family court had rightly granted maintenance. It is further submitted - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27843 RPFC No. 291 of 2023 that the court had granted a meager amount of Rs.4,000/- and there is no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the court. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. The family court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.4,000/- to the wife. The fact that the husband has contested in the elections and he has filed the declaration at the time of election, but all these things are not disclosed. Considering the financial capacity of the husband, the court had granted maintenance. There is no evidence on record to show that the wife is gainfully employed. Under these circumstances this court is of the view that the family court had rightly granted the maintenance and there are no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the family court. 6. Hence, this court is passing the following: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27843 RPFC No. 291 of 2023 ORDER i. Accordingly, the RPFC is dismissed. ii. All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19