- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA RPFC NO.74 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SRI. HARISH SON OF RUKKMAYYA POOJARI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT 2-82 KATTAPUNI HOUSE TIRUVAIL VAMANJOOR MANGALURU TALUK …PETITIONER (BY SRI RANJAN KUMAR K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SUMITRA WIFE OF HARISH DAUGHTER OF BHOJA POOJARI AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 2. MASTER ADITYA AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS 3. KUMARI KHUSHI AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 ARE THE CHILDREN OF HARISH AND SUMITRA Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 ALL ARE RESIDING AT PARARI HOUSE VAMANJOOR POST AND VILLAGE MANGALURU TALUK …RESPONDENTS (R-1, R-2 AND R-3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.11.2025 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO.107/2022 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, D.K MANGALURU, WHICH DIRECTED THE PETITIONER TO PAY A MONTHLY MAINTENANCE OF RS.12,000 TO RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 AND RE-ASSESS THE MAINTENANCE AMOUNT IN LIGHT OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1'S INDEPENDENT INCOME FROM HER EMPLOYMENT AT CITY CENTRE AND HER TAILORING/CATERING BUSINESS. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 21.07.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 CAV ORDER This RPFC is filed against the order of the Family Court in Crl.M.C.No.107/2022 dated 15.11.2025. 2. Wife and children filed the said application for maintenance. Family Court considering the entire evidence on record directed the husband to pay future maintenance at the rate of Rs.12,000/- per month to the petitioners No.2 and 3 from the date of petition i.e. 07.12.2022 till they attains the age of majority and economically become independent. Claim against the first petitioner is dismissed. It is stated that they are also entitled for Rs.10,000/- towards costs. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner/husband filed this appeal. 3. It is stated by the petitioner/husband that his marriage with the first respondent/wife was performed on 08.05.2008 and their son was born on 10.01.2010 and daughter was born on 27.04.2012. Respondent/wife filed complaint against Domestic Violence Act on 03.11.2018. It is stated that his wife is doing Catering service in Tiruvail. When he attributed extra marital affair in front of her colleague, she lost her job. She also sustained injuries to her leg, treated in - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 Wenlock hospital, and she stayed with her parents for seven months. On 29.04.2015 he attacked with a sickle, injured her on thighs. He is working as an Electrician and earning Rs.30,000/- per month and also performs electrical contract work and total income exceeds Rs.60,000/-. He also owns property in Tiruvail village. He filed M.C.No.161/2019 for restitution of conjugal rights. It was allowed on 29.07.2022, but his wife has not joined him. She also filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in M.C.No.361/2019, it was dismissed on 25.11.2022. He stated that his wife was earning Rs.35,000/- per month from Catering, Tailoring and Garments work and she is also doing employment at City Center Complex at Mangalore, whereas he is suffering from chronic health issues, unable to perform strenuous electrical work and he is not earning Rs.30,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month as stated by her. She has not filed any Title Deeds to show that he is having movable and immovable properties. The amount of Rs.12,000/- granted by the Family Court is exorbitant. 4. In the assets and liabilities disclosures by his wife her actual earnings are shown. Family Court considered his - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 notional income against the annual income of his wife. She deserted him in the year 2015, but he stated that it has September 2018. The maintenance is granted from 07.12.2022. Ignoring the fact that she filed maintenance application with a long delay, conduct of the parties is not considered. It is alleged that he is addicted to the alcohol, he stated that his wife is leading a lavish life working in a major commercial hub like City Center and thus requested the Court to set aside the order dated 15.11.2025 passed by the Family Court regarding maintenance. 5. Heard arguments from both sides. 6. Perusal of the record shows first petitioner is wife, second and third petitioners are children. There is no dispute regarding marriage and paternity. The wife contended that he lost his job in May 2014 at Mumbai and they returned to Mangalore, she joined in a Catering Company, but husband is addicted to alcohol and was attributing extra marital affair to her and also assaulted her. As such she took treatment in Wenlock Hospital. She joined him after seven months in view of reconciliation and advice of the elders he kept quite for one - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 month and started previous bad habits and continued to assault her physically. As such she gave complaint under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Her husband and his family members requested to settle the matter. She has withdrawn the petition and resided in a rented house. He is doing electrical work and earning Rs.30,000/- to Rs.60,000/-. As such claimed maintenance of Rs.25,000/- to her and to the minor children. She has borne the delivery expenses of the minor children i.e. petitioners No.2 and 3. An application is filed by her for amendment under I.A. No.III, but it was rejected on 30.10.2023. Aggrieved by the said order he preferred Writ Petition No.25054/2023, and stay was granted on 21.11.2023, but writ petition was dismissed on 24.07.2025. 7. When she gave complaint under Ex.P8, her husband gave undertaking under Ex.P9 stating that he will not interfere with the life of his wife and children. It shows that they are residing separately from then onwards. Though the petition for restitution of conjugal rights is allowed, he has not filed any petition under Order XXI Rule 32 of the CPC or sought for divorce, when his wife has not joined him. Respondent/wife - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 stated that in July 2023 she was residing in a rented house and deposited Rs.50,000/- towards as security amount and also paying an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month towards rent and one Maruti Baleno Car bearing Registration No.KA-19 MM-4160 is in her name, but she stated that actual owner is her father and he kept the car in her name and also taking the rents arising out of the said movable property. petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are studying in 2nd PUC and 8th Standard respectively. It is stated that wife got Rs.18,000/- per month to her bank account on 13.06.2023 and also regularly getting income of Rs.17,500/- from Deeraj Shetty and it appears the said amount is paid as monthly rent. She purchased Car by obtaining loan from Toyota Financial Services India Limited to an extent of Rs.07,85,828/-. She has not filed any document to show that her father is the actual owner. Loan is discharged fully on 28.07.2025 and the said documents are filed under R3 to R17. Petitioner/husband stated that his parents are aged 81 and 70 years respectively and filed photographs under Exs.R18 and 19. He stated that he is working as Electrician and earning only Rs.10,000/- per month. It is also stated that his wife borrowed loan of - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 Rs.2,90,900/- from Muthoot Finance Limited, Mangaluru, on 23.09.2025. Considering all these facts, the Family Court dismissed the claim of the first petitioner/wife but granted an amount of Rs.12,000/- per month to both the children i.e. petitioners No.2 and 3. 8. The main contention of the wife is that her husband addicted to alcohol and also assaulted her physically. She sustained injuries and was hospitalized. As such she deserted him. The main contention of the writ petitioner/husband is that his wife is earning Rs.35,000/- by doing Catering and also working in City Center and leading lavish life. The said fact was considered by the Family Court and not granted any amount for maintenance of the wife. But, the writ petitioner stated an amount of Rs.12,000/- granted towards maintenance of the minor children is excessive, as he was getting only Rs.10,000/- per month by doing electrical work. 9. There is no dispute regarding the fact that he is an Electrician. His wife stated that he is earning Rs.30,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month, but husband stated that he is getting only Rs.10,000/- per month. He is also having other properties. - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010199262026 NC: 2026:KHC:38110 RPFC No. 74 of 2026 As a father he is duty bound to maintain his minor children. Family Court considered all the facts, rightly directed him to pay maintenance of Rs.12,000/- per month to petitioners No.2 and 3/minor children (at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per month to each child). 10. The amount granted by the Family Court, D.K., Mangaluru, in Crl.M.C.No.107/2022 dated 15.11.2025 is just and reasonable and this Court finds no reason to set aside the order. In the result, RFPC is dismissed confirming the order of the Family Court. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53