- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 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. 100121 OF 2022 (-) C/W REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100202 OF 2024 IN RPFC NO.100121/2022: BETWEEN: AJAMEERSAB S/O. PEERSAB NADAF, AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. F.D.A, R/O. KOUJAGERI, TQ. RON, DIST. GADAG NOW RESIDING AT DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SHAHPUR BELAGAVI DIST. BELAGAVI – 590003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RESHMABEGUM W/O. AJAMEERSAB NADAF, AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SEVALAL NAGAR, KALASAPUR ROAD - 581107 NEAR KADALIVANA MATH, TQ AND DIST. GADAG. 2. AYESHA D/O AJAMEERSAB NADAF, AGE. 12 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. SEVALAL NAGAR, KALASAPUR ROAD, GADAG – 581107 V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.17 11:50:32 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 of 2024 SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.N. NARASAMMANAVAR, ADVOCATE) RPFC FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.07.2022 PASSED BY I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT GADAG IN CRL.MISC.PET.NO.98/2020, BY ALLOWING THE PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. IN RPFC NO.100202/2024: BETWEEN: 1. RESHMABEGUM W/O. AJAMEERSAB NADAF, AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SEVALAL NAGAR, KALASAPUR ROAD, NEAR KADALIVANA MATH, TQ / DIST. GADAG. 2. AYESHA D/O. AJAMEERSAB NADAF, AGE. 13 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. SEVALAL NAGAR, KALASAPUR ROAD, GADAG. SINCE MINOR R/BY MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G. N. NARASAMMANAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND: AJAMEERSAB S/O. PEERSAB NADAF, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. F.D.A., R/O.KOUJAGERI, TQ. RON, DIST. GADAG. NOW RESIDING AT DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 of 2024 ADMINISTRATION, SHAHPUR, BELAGAVI, DIST.GADAG. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 13.07.2022 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, GADAG IN CRL.MISC.PET NO.98/2020 BY ALLOWING THE PETITION AND BY ENHANCING THE MAINTENANCE AMOUNT RS.50,000/- FOR PETITIONER NO.1 TILL HER LIFE TIME AND RS.50.000/- FOR PETITIONER NO.2 TILL SHE GETS MARRIED ALONG WITH THE SPECIAL COMPENSATION OF RS.1,00,000/- IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER RPFC No.100202/2024 is filed by the petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous No.98/2020, challenging the order dated 13.07.2022 on the file of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’), seeking enhancement of maintenance to the petitioners. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 of 2024 2. RPFC No.100121/2022 is filed by the respondent-husband challenging the order dated 13.07.2022 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.98/2020 on the file of the Family Court. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 06.05.2007 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is the case of the petitioners that, the respondent was retired from Indian Army and has joined the office of the Municipal Administration, Belagavi as First Division Assistant. It is also stated in the petition that, the respondent was ill-treating the petitioners and further the respondent has filed OS No.9/2021 to harass the petitioners so also made allegation with regard to the character of the respondent. It is stated that the petitioners have left the matrimonial home and living separately and as such filed Criminal Miscellaneous No.98/2020 seeking maintenance. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 of 2024 5. On service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed detailed statement of objection stating that the petitioner No.1 herself deserted the company of the respondent and further, the petitioners have been taken care of by the respondent and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. 6. The Family Court after considering the material on record by its order dated 13.07.2022, granted maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month each to the petitioners. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred RPFC No.100202/2024. 7. I have heard Sri. G. N. Narasammanavar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in RPFC 100202/2024 and Sri. Sadiq N. Goodwala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in RPFC No.100121/2022. 8. Sri. Sadiq N. Goodwala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of the Court to the cross examination of PW1 and argued that, the respondent-husband was taking care of the needs of the petitioners and provided education expenses to the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 of 2024 petitioner No.2 and despite the same the Family Court has awarded maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month each to the petitioners, which requires to interference by this Court. 9. On the other hand, Sri. G. N. Narasammanavar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in RPFC No.100202/2024 argued that, the award of maintenance is on the lesser side and family necessities requires additional maintenance and accordingly sought for interference of this Court. 10. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 with the respondent was solemnized on 06.05.2007 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 is born. It is not in dispute that the respondent is working at Municipal Administration, Belagavi as FDA. It is also not in dispute that the parties are residing separately and therefore, taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence on the record, I do not find any merit in both the petitions. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2839 RPFC No. 100121 of 2022 C/W RPFC No. 100202 of 2024 11. Accordingly, petitions are dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SMM/ CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13