- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32166 RPFC No. 129 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 129 OF 2019 BETWEEN: M.S.SANJU AGED 42 YEARS, S/O M.K. SIDDALINGE GOWDA R/AT NO 1376, 5TH CROSS, II MAIN, KRISHNAMURTHYNAGAR MYSORE – 570 004 …PETITIONER (BY MS.KEERTHANA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.KARUMBAIAH T.A., ADVOCATE SMT.P.C.VANITHA, ADVOCATE) AND: C.V.VEENAPRIYADARSHINI AGED 39 YEARS D/O LATE VIJAYAKUMAR R/AT NO 83, ROOPANAGAR, M K HALLI POST, DASANAKOPPALU GATE, JAYAPURA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) FAMILY COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.09.2018 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO.151/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.127(2) OF CR.PC., 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:32166 RPFC No. 129 of 2019 ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed in C.Misc.No.151/2016 dated 19.09.2018 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru, whereby the Family Court had allowed the petition filed by the petitioner/husband. 2. The petition was filed by the petitioner under Section 127 (2) of Cr.P.C. seeking to pass an order to stop the maintenance sanctioned to the respondent in C.Misc.No.32/2004 dated 07.09.2007 with effect from the date of petition. However, the allowance of maintenance granted to the respondent as per order passed in C.Misc.No.332/2004 dated 07.09.2007 is cancelled w.e.f. 01.01.2018. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that when the petition is filed on 05.03.2016, the order should relate back to the said date. But without any basis, the Family Court had taken a decision on 01.01.2018 and later the same was pronounced on 19.09.2018. The Family Court had directed the petitioner not to pay the amount from 01.01.2018 and it should have been from 05.03.2016. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32166 RPFC No. 129 of 2019 4. Though notice is served on the respondent, no vakalath is filed on behalf of her. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. Considering the changed circumstances where the petitioner is not in a position to pay the maintenance and where the respondent is earning, the petitioner had filed C.Misc.No.151/2016 is filed under Section 127 (2) of Cr.P.C. The Family Court had come to the conclusion that there are changed circumstances and the husband is not having income and the wife is earning and the Family Court had held that the order dated 07.09.2007 has reached its finality. But in the order, it is stated that the allowance of maintenance granted to the respondent as per order in C.Misc.No.332/2004 dated 07.09.2007 is cancelled w.e.f 01.01.2018. As rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it should have been from the date of petition i.e., 05.03.2016. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. The order passed in C.Misc.No.151/2016 dated 19.09.2018 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32166 RPFC No. 129 of 2019 Mysuru, is modified and the allowance of maintenance granted to the respondent as per order in C.Misc.No.332/2004 dated 07.09.2007 is cancelled with effect from 05.03.2016 i.e. from the date of the petition filed under Section 127(2) of Cr.P.C. ii. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed. iii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1