- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2164 RPFC No. 200015 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 200015 OF 2024 BETWEEN: HAJI MALANG S/O MOHIUDDIN JAMADAR, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: GRAPHIC DESIGNER, R/O: H.NO.992/3B/2C, KAMALI MUJARATH ROAD, YADULLA COLONY, KALABURAGI – 585 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI LIYAQAT FAREED USTAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. NASEEM BEGUM W/O HAJI MALANG, AGE 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 2. UZMA FARAH D/O HAJI MALANG, AGE 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 3. SIAMANAZ D/O HAJI MALANG, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2164 RPFC No. 200015 of 2024 U/G OF THEIR NATURAL MOTHER I.E., RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ALL ARE R/O: H NO.992/3B/2C, KAMALI MUJARATH ROAD, YADULLA COLONY, KALABURAGI – 585 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GANESH S.KALBURGI AND SRI G.V.DESHPANDE, SRI ANANTH S. JAHAGIRDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; R3 IS MINOR U/S R1) THIS REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 18.12.2023 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT JUDGE FAMILY COURT, AT KALABURAGI IN CRL.MISC.NO.101/2022 AND ETC. THIS REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard. 2. The parties are referred as per their ranking before the Trial Court. 3. The respondent has filed this petition assailing the order of maintenance of Rs.4000/- per month in favour of petitioners No.2 and 3. The respondent before this Court is the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2164 RPFC No. 200015 of 2024 father of the petitioners No.2 & 3, and husband of petitioner No.1. 4. The petition before Trial Court is filed by the wife and two children and petition filed by the wife is dismissed and claim of two children are allowed in part, awarding monthly maintenance of Rs.4000/- each, to petitioners No.2 & 3 till they get marry or till they start earning, whichever event is earlier. 5. The order also directs to the present petitioner bear the educational expenses of his two daughters till they attain the age of majority. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein Sri Liyaqat Fareed Ustad, vehemently submits that the Family Court erred in passing the impugned order. It is his submission that the wife is earning Rs.22,000/- per month, as a rent from the house, which the premises is provided by the petitioner. It is also his further submission that another son is an Aeronautical Engineer having handsome salary and wife and all the children are residing in one place, as such, the petition filed by the daughters seeking maintenance is not maintainable. 7. It is also further submission that though the present petitioner was earlier working in Dubai, for health reasons he - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2164 RPFC No. 200015 of 2024 has now shifted to India and he has no income, as such, he submits that the impugned order awarding maintenance of Rs.4,000/-, to each of the daughters is not maintainable. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents on the other hand would contend that the impugned order is justified in circumstances and merely because wife is earning rental income that does not mean that the daughters are not entitled to claim maintenance from the father. It is also submitted that the claim made by the wife seeking maintenance is rejected and wife has accepted in the said order. However, the said income is not sufficient to meet the educational expenses of the daughters. Thus, it is urged to dismiss the petition. 9. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 10. It is evident from the impugned order that the petition filed by the wife seeking maintenance is rejected. However, the petition filed by daughters is allowed by awarding each of the daughters Rs.4000/- per month. It is also noticed that petitioner No.2 before the Family Court was aged 17 years, when the case was filed in the year 2022 and petitioner No.3 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2164 RPFC No. 200015 of 2024 before the Family Court was aged 15 years when the case was filed. The impugned order would also reveal that the educational expenses ordered to be paid are ordered only to two daughters till they attain the age of 18 years. 11. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that awarding of maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month, to each of the daughters and educational expenses, till they attain the age of the 18 years is not on higher side. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merits in the matter. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47