- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2079 RPFC No. 200021 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 200021 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. VISHNU S/O LATE ANILKUMAR AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: SHOWN AS BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURE, R/O: KARADIGUDDA VILLAGE, TQ: MANVI, DIST : RAICHUR – 584 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI ANANTH S. JAHAGIRDHAR, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ROOPA @ VIJAYLAXMI W/O VISHU AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: H.NO.18, MALADAKAL VILLAGE TQ: DEVADURGA, DIST: RAICHUR – 584 111. NOW RESIDING KALLUR COLONY, STATION ROAD, RAICHUR. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE) THIS REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22.08.2024 PASSED CRIMINAL MISC.NO.12/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPALS JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, RAICHUR, AND TO PASS ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE ORDERS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2079 RPFC No. 200021 of 2025 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) This petition is filed challenging the order dated 22.08.2024 in Criminal Misc. No.12/2024 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raichur. In a petition filed by the wife invoking Section 125 of Code of Civil Procedure, the Family Court awarded monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month as against the claim of Rs.20,000/- per month. 2. The husband is before this Court on the premise that, the husband could not appear before the Family Court and contest the matter. Thus, the husband prays for remand of the matter. It is also urged that, the relationship with the respondent is disputed by the petitioner and the petitioner claims that, he is already married to another lady, before the alleged marriage with respondent. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2079 RPFC No. 200021 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-wife on the other hand would submit that, the petitioner is the legally wedded wife and no reasons are made out to remand the matter and the absence before the trial Court is not satisfactorily explained despite due service of notice. 4. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 5. From the records it is noticed that, the notice is duly served on the petitioner who is the respondent before the Family Court. However, he has not chosen to appear and contest the matter. Now the petitioner has come out with a defence that, he has married to another lady and the respondent is not his wife. This Court is not in a position to appreciate the contention of the petitioner for want of evidence, as the petitioner-husband has not led evidence before the Family Court. Though this Court does not find any error in the order passed by the Family Court, as the said order is passed without there being any rebuttal evidence, to ensure complete justice, this Court is of the view that, the matter has to be remitted to the Family Court for fresh - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2079 RPFC No. 200021 of 2025 adjudication permitting the petitioner to file statement of objection and to contest the matter. 6. However, it is also required to be noticed that, on account of the petitioner’s default, the respondent is put to inconvenience. Hence, the petitioner has to be put on terms. This Court is of the view that, a cost of Rs.25,000/- would balance the equities and payment of cost is made a condition precedent for the petitioner before this Court to contest the matter before the Family Court. 7. It is also noticed that, an application for interim maintenance was filed by the wife before the Family. The same was not considered by the Family Court as the petitioner did not appear and contest the matter. 8. Under these circumstances, if the applicant/wife presses the application for interim maintenance before the Family Court, seeking interim maintenance, the same has to be considered in accordance with law, before considering the case on merits. 9. Hence, the following order: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2079 RPFC No. 200021 of 2025 ORDER (i) The petition is allowed; (ii) The impugned order dated 22.08.2024 in Criminal Misc. No.12/2024 on the file of the Family Court, Raichur is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Family Court for fresh Consideration. (iii) The petitioner before this Court shall pay Rs.25,000/- towards costs of the proceedings before the trial Court as well as costs of this petition. (iv) On such payment, the petitioner before this Court is permitted to file statement of objections and to contest the matter. It is made clear that, in case the petitioner before the Family Court presses for interim application to be heard, the same shall be considered on merits, before passing final order. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2079 RPFC No. 200021 of 2025 (v) It is further made clear that, nothing is expressed on the merits of the claim of the either parties. (vi) In case, the interim application or the petition is allowed it shall be from the date of the interim application or in case the petition is allowed, the same shall be ordered from the date of the original petition. (vii) The parties shall appear before the Family Court on 24.04.2025. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42