- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4648 RPFC No. 25 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO.25 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI SOMANAGOUDA S/O. PAKKIRAGOUDA THANGODARA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT ALALAGERI, TALUK-BYADIGI DISTRICT-HAVERI-581 106. …PETITIONER (BY SRI VASANTH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR; SRI SRIKANTH PATIL K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. DEEPA @ NEHA W/O. SOMANAGOUDA THANGODARA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS 2. VACHANA D/O. SOMANAGOUDA THANGODARA AGED ABOUT 2½ YEARS Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4648 RPFC No. 25 of 2023 RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO.1-SMT. DEEPA @ NEHA BOTH ARE RESIDING AT C/O. MAHANTHESHA H. BAIRAPURA HEBBAL DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 556 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2022 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.234/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF CR.P.C. FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4648 RPFC No. 25 of 2023 ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Vasanth Kumar who represents Sri.Srikanth Patil.K, learned counsel on record for the petitioner as well as Sri.Hareesh Bhandary.T, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This revision petition is the outcome of the order that is rendered by the Family Court, Davanagere in Crl.Misc.No.234/2020 dated 02.11.2022. The first respondent who is the wife and the second respondent who is the minor daughter of the petitioner herein filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C seeking maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month. The Court through the impugned order directed the petitioner herein to pay respondent No.1 a sum of Rs.5,000/- and respondent No.2 a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month towards maintenance in addition to the interim maintenance awarded by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Davanagere in Crl.Misc.No.488/2020. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4648 RPFC No. 25 of 2023 3. With a submission that the petitioner is not liable to pay any amount towards maintenance of the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner till recently was willing to take back respondent No.1 to marital fold. He also filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights and the said petition was allowed. But respondent No.1 did not join the petitioner. Learned counsel states that petitioner is under obligation to look after his aged mother. Respondent No.1 on the other hand is working as nurse and thereby she has got sufficient means to maintain herself as well as the child. Thus award of maintenance in favour of the respondents is unjustifiable and therefore, the present revision petition is filed. 4. Opposing the submission thus made, learned counsel for the respondents submits that respondent No.2 suffers from locomotive disorder and the said child cannot move and perform duties as that of normal children. Learned counsel further submits that respondent No.1 is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4648 RPFC No. 25 of 2023 not doing any job whatsoever and even now respondent No.1 is willing to join her husband i.e., the petitioner herein provided he sets up separate family. 5. Petitioner and respondent No.1 are present before this Court in person. On a query posed by this Court to the petitioner whether he is willing to take respondent No.1 back to marital fold, petitioner replied that he is not willing to take her back. 6. No proof is produced to show that respondent No.1 is working as nurse and thereby has got her own source of income. It is not in dispute that the second respondent is under the care and custody of first respondent. The Court taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case has awarded justifiable sum towards maintenance. Undoubtedly, the petitioner is a Government servant who is earning Rs.32,708/- per month as per the contents of Ex.P2 - Salary Certificate. Therefore, this Court is of the view that - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4648 RPFC No. 25 of 2023 the amount awarded as maintenance by the Family Court is justifiable and therefore, there are no grounds for interference. Resultantly, the revision petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE NS CT:VC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80