- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5064 RPFC No. 100190 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100190 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: RIYAZ AHAMMAD S/O. GIDDUSAB BAGAWAN, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: ASST. TEACHER, R/O. GAJENDRAGAD, TQ: RON, DT: GADAG, NOW R/O. KALAKAPUR, TQ: GAJENDRAGAD, DT: GADAG, P.C. NO: 585101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.G. MOGALI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. MALANABI @ NAZNEEN W/O. RIYAZ AHAMMAD BAGAWAN, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. NEAR OLD VEGETABLE MARKET, NALABAND GALLI, BAGALKOT, TQ: AND DIST: BAGALKOT P.C. NO: 587 101. 2. NIHAL AHAMMAD S/O. RIYAZ AHAMMAD BAGAWAN, AGE: 6 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. NEAR OLD VEGETABLE MARKET, NALABAND GALLI, BAGALKOT, TQ: AND DIST: BAGALKOT P.C. NO: 587 101. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER GUARDIAN-RESPONDENT NO. 1 …RESPONDENTS THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN CRI.MISC.NO.14/2020 DATED 01.10.2024 BY PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BAGALKOT AND DISMISS THE CRL.MISC.NO.14/2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.03.22 15:55:13 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5064 RPFC No. 100190 of 2024 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the respondent-husband challenging the order dated 01.10.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.14/2020 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bagalkot (for short the “the Family Court”) granting maintenance to the petitioner therein. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that the marriage of petitioner No.1-wife with respondent-husband was solemnized on 03.02.2017 and in their wedlock, petitioner No.2 was born. It is further averred in the petition that the respondent-husband and his parents were assaulting the petitioner No.1-wife without any cause and also not providing the basic necessities to the petitioners and as such, the petitioner No.1-wife left the matrimonial - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5064 RPFC No. 100190 of 2024 home and started residing separately from the respondent-husband. It is also stated that the respondent- husband is working in Sanganatti Government High School of Mudhol Taluk and also having immovable properties. Hence, the petitioners have filed Crl.Misc.No.14/2020 seeking maintenance. 3.1. After service of notice, the respondent-husband entered appearance before the Family Court and filed detailed objections denying the allegations made against him by the petitioners. It is the specific case of the respondent-husband that the petitioner was not respecting the respondent-husband and his family members and the petitioner-wife was adamant and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. 3.2. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 01.10.2024 allowed the petition in part by directing the respondent-husband to pay ₹15,000/- per month to petitioner No.1-wife and ₹10,000/- per month to petitioner No.2-child. Feeling - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5064 RPFC No. 100190 of 2024 aggrieved by the same, respondent-husband has preferred this petition. 4. I have heard Sri. P. G. Mogali, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein/respondent-husband. It is contended by the learned counsel that the respondent- husband has deposed before the Family Court that he is ready to take back the petitioner No.1-wife and petitioner No.2-child, but petitioner No.1-wife has refused to join the matrimonial home despite having judgment and decree in O.S.No.39/2020. Accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 5. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein, it is not in dispute that the marriage of the respondent- husband with the petitioner-wife was solemnized on 03.02.2017 and in their wedlock a child was born. It is also not in dispute that the parties are residing separately. Taking into consideration the fact that the respondent- husband is working at a Government school and as per the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5064 RPFC No. 100190 of 2024 finding recorded by the Family Court at paragraph 23 and 24, the salary of the respondent-husband for the month of March-2024 is ₹67,174/- and since it is not in dispute as per Ex.P8 and Ex.P9 that the respondent-husband is having agricultural income also and in that view of the matter, taking into consideration the status of the parties, I am of the view that no interference is called for in this petition. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed being devoid of merits. 6. In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE YAN CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26