- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28840 RPFC No. 39 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 39 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RAZIYA SULTHANA W/O B.MURTHUZA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/AT 3RD CROSS, IDGHA NAGAR, SOLEBYLU, SHIVAMOGGA-577 201 2. MOHAMMED ZAID, S/O B MURTHUZA, AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS, MINOR, REP BY IST PETITIONER AS A NATURAL GUARDIAN, R/O 3RD CROSS, IDGHA NAGAR, SOLEBYLU, SHIVAMOGGA-577201 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R.B.DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND: B. MURTHUZA S/O BASHEER SAB, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: COLLIE, R/O B.R.P.POST, SINGANMANE VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 301 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28840 RPFC No. 39 of 2022 THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09.12.2021 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.67/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, SHIVAMOGGA, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF Cr.P.C FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.67/2019 dated 09.12.2021 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Shivamogga, whereby the Family Court had granted monthly maintenance of an amount of Rs.3,000/- to petitioner No.2/son and had rejected the claim of petitioner No.1/wife. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. The wife had filed the petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance for herself and her son. It is the case of the wife that the husband is having landed properties and he is capable of paying maintenance of an amount of Rs.20,000/- each to the wife and the son. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28840 RPFC No. 39 of 2022 4. According to the husband, he is working as a Gardener in the Kuvempu University and earning an amount of Rs.9,500/- and he cannot pay the maintenance as sought by the wife. It is stated that he is not having the movable and immovable properties of his own. 5. There is no representation on behalf of the respondent/father. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the material on record. The Family Court had rejected the claim of the wife seeking maintenance as the M.C. that is filed for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed and the wife had not joined the husband. As far as that issue is concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere as the said order rejecting maintenance to the wife is a well considered one as the M.C. filed seeking restitution of conjugal rights is allowed as she is staying away from the husband without a reasonable cause. According to the husband, he is earning an amount of Rs.9,500/- per month. The wife had filed RTC extracts i.e., Ex.P.4 to show that the husband is having agricultural property to an extent of 2 acres. Though there is no evidence what - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28840 RPFC No. 39 of 2022 would be the income that he is deriving from the said property, but he would be getting income apart from the salary he is receiving working as a gardener. In that view of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following order: ORDER i. The order passed in Crl.Misc.No.67/2019 dated 09.12.2021 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Shivamogga, is modified. As far as petitioner No.2/son is concerned, the maintenance is enhanced from an amount of Rs.3,000/- to Rs.4,000/-. ii. As far as the claim of petitioner No.1/wife is concerned, this Court is confirming the order of the trial Court. iii. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of. iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5