- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31755-DB MFA No. 9173 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9173 OF 2017 (MC) BETWEEN: MALLAMMA W/O BASAVAIAH D/O SANNAUGRAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O DIBBADAHALLI VILLAGE, SHETTIKERE HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 571 604 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH MOOLIMANI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S V PRAKASH.,ADVOCATE) AND: BASAVAIAH S/O NARASAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O GODEKERE VILLAGE SHETTIKERE HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 571 604 …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31755-DB MFA No. 9173 of 2017 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 28(1) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.08.2017 PASSED IN M.C NO.25/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, DISSOLVING THE MARRIAGE BETWEEN THE APPELLANT AND THE RESPONDENT SOLEMNIZED ON 21.08.1989 UNDER SECTION 13(1)(a) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND ETC THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) This appeal has been instituted by the appellant/wife against the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2017 in M.C.No.25/2014 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, at Chikkanayakanahalli. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant/wife submits that he does not have much to say on the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. He has confined his submission in respect of permanent alimony of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31755-DB MFA No. 9173 of 2017 Rs.2,00,000/- granted by the Family Court to the appellant/wife. He also submits that the respondent/husband has not paid an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- permanent alimony granted by the Family Court. He further submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the income of the respondent/husband, the amount of alimony fixed by the Family Court is meagre and much below what ought to have been granted. 3. On our query, the learned counsel for the appellant/wife submits that the appellant’s husband was a Peon in School who has retired on attainng the age of superannuation on 28.02.2013. We find no reason to enhance the alimony in respect of a person who had retired way back in the year 2013. We therefore dismiss the appeal. 4. However, if the appellant/wife has not been paid the alimony of Rs.2,00,000/- as fixed by the Family Court, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31755-DB MFA No. 9173 of 2017 the appellant/wife may take recourse to appropriate proceedings as may be available to her under the law. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE KS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29