- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30813 RPFC No. 301 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 301 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SRI SURESH S/O LATE ANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT SANNAIAHANA STREET, PERIYAPATNA MYSORE DISTRICT-570078 NOW R/AT NAY KUP HOUSE KOI PADI KASARAGODU KUMBLA, KERALA-671321 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. REVANASIDDAPPA H. K..,ADVOCATE) AND: SMT SUJATHA K.R. W/O SRI SURESH A AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT 21/1, 1ST CROSS, VALMIKI ROAD, MIDEL HOUSE, V V MOHALLA, H D KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-570002 NOW R/AT NO.783 1ST MAIN, CANTOR ROAD GOKULAM, MYSURU-570002 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30813 RPFC No. 301 of 2022 THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT 1984 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.11.2022 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.No.849/2021 ON THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF Cr.P.C FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.849 of 2021 dated 17.11.2022 by the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru, the husband is before this court questioning the maintenance of an amount of ₹ 8,000/- granted to the wife. 2. It is the case of the husband that he is not in a position to pay the amount. He has no income of his own. He has dedicated himself to the God and he is living in a ashram and not in a position to pay. It is also his case that he has got the daughters married and at the time of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30813 RPFC No. 301 of 2022 marriage, he has paid an amount of ₹ 8,00,000/- to the daughters and it is his case that the wife is working and she is not entitled for any maintenance. 3. The court by order impugned had granted maintenance. While granting the maintenance, the court had observed the conduct of the petitioner /husband, who has stated that after the desertion, he has never enquired about the daughter and the wife, and also the fact that he is not aware that the wife had got a paralytic stroke and the court also considered the contradictory stands that are taken by the husband and accordingly considering the joint family properties he is owning and the fact that he is capable of giving ₹ 8,00,000/-, court has granted ₹ 10,000/- as maintenance. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the grounds that were taken before the court and submits that the wife is earning. He is not having any income and he is not in a position to pay the amount. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30813 RPFC No. 301 of 2022 5. This court having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the material on the court. The family court granted ₹10,000/- s maintenance. It is their case that from a long time they are staying separately. According to the husband, he has completely committed himself to the God and he is at the service of God and he says that he has the properties, but the properties are not partitioned. He submits that he has paid an amount ₹8,00,000/- to the wife for the marriage of the daughter and the court has come to the conclusion that at every point of time, he has failed to take care of the family and his own admission show that he was never in touch and he has never tried to enquire about the well being of the children or the wife. Considering all these aspects, court has granted maintenance of an amount of ₹10,000/-. 6. This court has perused the order and considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The court considering the evidence on record - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30813 RPFC No. 301 of 2022 and the fact that he is owning immovable properties and he has no requirement of the money as he is in the service of God and he is residing in the ashram had rightly granted ₹10,000/-, this court finds no reasons to interfere. This court is passing the following: O R D E R (i) The writ petition is dismissed. (ii) All I.As. in this writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4