- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29754 WP No. 11649 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 11649 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI. NAGESHWAR NARAYANA, S/O. LT COL. NARAYANA (RETD), AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.107/108, 2ND CROSS, BABUSAPALYA, KALYAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560 043. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA HALINATHOTA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. ANITHA KUMARI M.S., W/O. NAGESHWAR NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.399, 2ND FLOOR, 5TH AVENUE, TEACHERS COLONY, VENKATAPURA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU -560 034. 2. SMT. JYOTHI MANJUNATH, W/O. LATE MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, WORKING AT THE LEARNING TREE PRE SCHOOL DAY CARE AND ACTIVITY CENTRE, NO.529, 8TH MAIN, 1ST CROSS, SADANANDANAGARA, OPP. NGEF PARK, NGEF LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 038. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ADINARAYANAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND SRI. ANIL RAMACHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29754 WP No. 11649 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON I.A.NO.4 FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT IN M.C.NO.2501/2020 DATED 10.03.2025 ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE V ADDL. PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in M.C. No.2501/2020 dated 10.03.2025 by the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had dismissed I.A.No.4 filed by the husband seeking maintenance, the husband is before this Court. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. It is the case that the wife had filed I.A.No.2 and the husband had filed I.A.No.4 seeking maintenance to the children. By order impugned, the Family Court had dismissed both the applications. As far as the wife is concerned, she had not questioned the order, but the husband is before this Court questioning the order passed in I.A.No.4. It is the case of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29754 WP No. 11649 of 2025 husband that he is taking care of the two children and the wife is staying away from the matrimonial home. It is the case of the husband that he has to take care of the two children and the wife is having sufficient means, she has to pay the maintenance to the children. If she is ready to take back the children, he is ready to give and he is also ready to give the divorce and also he came up with the settlement that if the wife accepts the children, he would be giving the property. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ husband in support of his case had relied on the judgment passed by the Allahabad High Court in case of Amit Kumar Sharma Vs. VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bijnor and others arising out of W.P.No.13330/19981, also relied on the judgment passed by the Bombay High Court in case of Ashok Shamjibhai Dharod Vs. Neeta Ashok Dharode and others2 and also he had relied on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Gaurav Nagpal v. Sumedha Nagpal3. Basing on these judgments, learned counsel submits that the Family Court had failed to consider the application of 1 AIR 1999 ALLAHABAD 4 2 AIR 2001 BOMBAY 142 3 AIR 2009 SC 557 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29754 WP No. 11649 of 2025 the husband seeking maintenance for the children and when he is taking care of the children, all the more reason that the Family Court ought to have granted the maintenance to the children. 5. Learned counsel appearing to the respondent/wife on instructions submits that the wife is not ready to take the responsibility as she is a handicapped person. Learned counsel submits that she is being supported by her parents although and with the pension of an amount of Rs.1,000/- per month given by the Government. She is eking out for her livelihood. In fact, she is in need of maintenance. The husband seeking maintenance from the wife who is handicapped is something which cannot be ordered. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. Either a wife or a husband, whoever is not in a position to maintain themselves can seek maintenance, there is no dispute on that proposition. While granting maintenance, the Family Court has to look at the financial capacity of the person from whom the maintenance is sought and also the financial capacity of the person who is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29754 WP No. 11649 of 2025 seeking the maintenance. In this case, nothing has been placed on record to show the financial capacity of the wife and it is also an admitted fact that the wife is physically handicapped. On what basis the husband is seeking maintenance, this Court is not able to understand. None of the judgments that were relied on by the petitioner applying to the facts of this case and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Family Court. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 50