- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2842 RPFC No. 100172 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100172 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: SHRI. SUNIL S/O. BHEEMAPPA ASUNDI, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: CORPORATION DRIVER, R/O. MADIHAL, TQ. & DIST: DHARWAD 580006. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. MAHADEVI ALIYAS MAHESHWARI W/O. SUNIL ASUNDI, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. HEBBALLI, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD - 580012. 2. KUMARI SATVIKA D/O SUNIL ASUNDI AGE 3 YEAS 10 MONTHS, OCC. NIL R/O. HEBBALLI, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD - 580012 SINCE R-2 IS MINOR SHE IS R/BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER I.E., RESPONDENT NO.1 …RESPONDENTS THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) FAMILY COURT ACT, PRAYING TO KINDLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER IN CRL. MISC. NO.185/2021, DATED 30.08.2024 BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE PETITION FILED BY RESPONDENT WIFE AND V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.17 11:51:14 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2842 RPFC No. 100172 of 2024 DAUGHTER UNDER SECTION 125 OF CR.P.C. BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the respondent, challenging the order dated 30.08.2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.185/2021 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Dharwad (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’), granting maintenance to the respondents herein. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that the marriage of the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 20.01.2020 at Dharwad and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is also stated in the petition that, the respondent and his family members were ill-treating the petitioners and also assaulted the petitioners and drove out the petitioners from the house. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2842 RPFC No. 100172 of 2024 It is also stated that, the petitioners have left the matrimonial home on account of ill-treatment meted out by them and they are residing with the parents of petitioner No.1. It is the case of the petitioners that, the respondent has neglected the petitioners and as such, the petitioners have filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.185/2021 seeking maintenance form the respondent. 4. On service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed detailed objections stating that, the petitioner No.1 has left the matrimonial home without any cause and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record by its order dated 30.08.2024, allowed the petition in part and directed the respondent – husband to pay maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.4,000/- per month to the petitioner No.2. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this petition. 6. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2842 RPFC No. 100172 of 2024 7. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the respondent No.1 herein has left the matrimonial home without cause and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the Family Court has committed an error in awarding Rs.9,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondents herein without taking into account the occupation of the petitioner herein and accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 8. In the light of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein, it is not in dispute that the marriage of petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 20.01.2020 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. Perusal of the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the parties are residing separately. 9. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration as the respondent has not shown his actual income before the Family Court and the Family Court - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2842 RPFC No. 100172 of 2024 taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners (wife and child) are residing separately and also taking care of the basic necessities of the petitioners awarded maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.4,000/- per month to the petitioner No.2 taking into consideration the declaration made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shamima Farooqui Vs. Shahid Khan1. Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner herein is able bodied and working as a driver, is to pay the maintenance awarded by the Family Court. It is also to be noted that, even if the wife is capable of earning, the said reason cannot be a ground to interfere with the order passed by the Family Court (see AIR 2017 SC 1174). 10. Taking into consideration the declaration of law made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, remedy under Section 125 is a measure of social justice to prevent the wives and children for falling into destitution and vagrancy [see (2021) 2 SCC 324]. 1 (2015) 5 SCC 705 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2842 RPFC No. 100172 of 2024 11. In the result, I do not find any perversity in the order passed by the Family Court. Accordingly, petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SMM CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2