- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33883 WP No. 11139 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 11139 OF 2023 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SMT. GOWRI V W/O SRI. MADHUSUDHAN K.A. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.10, 2ND FLOOR, BYRAVESHWARA SAMRUDHA ARCADE, PATTEGARAPALYA MAIN ROAD GOVINDRAJA NAGAR WARD PANCHASHEEL NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 043. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIDYA S, ADVOCATE) AND: MADHUSUDHAN K A S/O K.N AMARNATH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.72, HARIHARA NILAYAM, 3RD CROSS, NEAR GANESHA TEMPLE, CHOLURPALYA, BENGALURU - 560 023. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VARSHA HITTINHALLI, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDR ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.04.2023, PASSED BY THE LEARNED V ADDL. FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU, ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S 24 IN IA NO.5 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 IN M.C.NO.373/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33883 WP No. 11139 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.V in MC.No.373/2020 dated 19.04.2023 passed by the V Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru whereby, the Family Court had rejected the application filed by the wife seeking maintenance, the wife is before this Court. 2. The MC is filed in the year 2020. IA No.V is filed in the year 2023 seeking maintenance for an amount of Rs.39,000/- per month. Admittedly, the income of the wife is Rs.35,000/- and the income of the husband is Rs.38,000/-. According to the wife, the husband is having other landed properties and she has taken loans and she has several expenses as such she requires the amount. The Family Court had rejected the application by the order impugned considering the income of both the parties and considering the fact that both parties have their own liabilities for payment of personal loans. Hence, the Family Court felt that the wife is capable to earn for herself and also has property gifted by her father and therefore, she is not entitled for maintenance. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33883 WP No. 11139 of 2023 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that the wife for the purpose of her marriage has taken loan and substantial amount of her salary is going towards payment of loan amount and further she has to take care of her parents and herself. The husband has not disclosed true facts about his income. He is having several properties and income from that is not disclosed. It is submitted that even as per his own statement he is getting Rs.38,000/- as salary and also Rs.12,000/- towards the rental income. In those circumstances, the Family Court ought to have granted maintenance to the wife. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/husband submits that when the MC is filed in the year 2020, till 2023 the wife had not filed any application and at the time of trial when the matter is posted for the evidence of the respondent/wife, at that point of time she has come up with this petition and after dismissal of the application by the Family Court she has filed the petition and also sought for stay of all further proceedings in the MC. In view of the interim order that is granted by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court the entire proceedings are - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33883 WP No. 11139 of 2023 stayed. It is submitted that at present the salary of the wife is Rs.1,00,000/-. She is more qualified than the husband and even her salary is Rs.35,000/- as stated is not the correct figure and according to the husband she is earning Rs.45,000/- as on the date of application and Rs.1,00,000/- today. It is submitted that the wife has come up with the application after almost 3 years from the date of the petition shows that she has no necessity and she is able to maintain herself. It is submitted that the Family Court had rightly dismissed the application. 5. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. Both the wife and husband are educated and earning. The wife's salary is Rs.35,000/- and the husband's salary is Rs.38,000/- as stated by the wife and husband. According to the wife, she has some more commitments and husband is having the properties and income which are not disclosed. According to the husband also it is the same grievance. The whole purpose of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is to take care of the needs of the wife in the interregnum period. In this case, admittedly, she has filed - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33883 WP No. 11139 of 2023 the application after 3 years, with even looking into that aspect, otherwise, also when the wife is earning substantially, on the ground that the husband is having other income cannot be a ground for the Family Court to grant maintenance. Considering the educational qualification and the income of both the parties, the Family Court had rightly rejected the petition and this Court finds no reason to interfere. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. All pending I.As if any in the writ petition also stand closed. The observations made by this Court are for the purpose of deciding the interlocutory application and it should not be construed as an expression of the Court and the Family Court shall consider the case on the merits of it. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE RJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16 CT: BHK