- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 102 OF 2020 BETWEEN: SRI. S. GOVINDA @ S. NAVEEN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA, R/AT D. NO. 1038, SARVAJANIKA, HOSTEL ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURAM, MYSURU - 570 008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AKARSH KUMAR GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. S RASHMI @ S LAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, W/O S GOVINDA @ S NAVEEN KUMAR, D/O SHIVSHANKAR, R/AT D NO 1641, UPPINAKERE, 2ND MAIN ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSURU - 570001. Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 2. CHI. HARSHITH G., AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS, S/O GOVINDA @ S NAVEEN KUMAR, (REP BY MOTHER RESPONDENT NO 1.) R/AT D. NO. 1641, UPPINAKERE, 2ND MAIN ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSURU - 570 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RACHANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MANMOHAN P.N., ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 IS A MINOR REP. BY R1) THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.09.2019 PASSED IN C.MISC.No.555/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, 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:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Akarsh Kumar Gowda, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms.Rachana who represents Sri.Manmohan.P.N, learned counsel on record for the respondents. 2. Aggrieved by the orders that were rendered by the Court of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru in C.Misc.No.555/2016 dated 11.09.2019, this revision petition is filed. 3. There is no dispute regarding the relationship between the parties that the revision petitioner is the husband of first respondent and father of second respondent. 4. For the sake of convenience of discussion parties to the proceedings will hereinafter be referred to as the husband, wife and child. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 5. Wife and child filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C i.e., C.Misc.No.555/2016 seeking the Court to grant maintenance from the husband. The Court of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru allowed the petition in part directing the husband to pay Rs.15,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.15,000/- per month to the child towards maintenance. 6. Submitting that the amount granted is exorbitant, learned counsel for the husband contends that the husband is a tempo driver who earns not more than Rs.16,000/- per month. He has no sources of earnings other than what he earns as driver. He has got 2 acres of land which yields nothing. Wife has shown all the family property to be the property of the husband and the Court without giving proper consideration to the documents produced by the wife granted huge sum as maintenance in her favour. Learned counsel thereby seeks to allow the revision petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 7. On the other hand, learned counsel who represents the wife and child states that sufficient evidence was produced before the trial Court in proof of the earnings of the husband and thus the maintenance granted is justifiable. 8. As per the version of wife and child, husband is having a lorry, he is a businessman involved in sale of cement, supply of building material, doing real estate business etc ., has got a commercial complex abutting Mysuru-Nanjanagudu road, has let out a portion of the commercial complex on rent for a hotel to run, he is having residential houses and thereby earns more than Rs.2,00,000/- per month. Even if it is taken into consideration that there is a commercial complex by name and style Sri.Sannegowda Devamma Commercial Complex and that Sannegowda is the father and Devamma is the mother of the husband, there is no material on record to show that the husband is running the said commercial complex and he derives earnings through the said - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 commercial complex. Production of documents itself is not sufficient. Through those documents, the party who produces those documents is required to establish that those documents proves the stand taken. In the case on hand, wife and child failed to establish in clear terms the earnings of the husband through the property that is mentioned in the documents produced. However by all the documentary evidence produced the wife and child succeeded in establishing that the family of the husband is well off. It will be highly difficult to hold that a person in the family which owns a huge commercial complex will eke out his livelihood as a driver of a tempo vehicle. However in the light of absence of any substantive proof with regard to the earnings of the husband, this Court is of the view that directing him to pay a total sum of Rs.30,000/- per month i.e., Rs.15,000/- for the wife and Rs.15,000/- for the child is unjustifiable. At the same time husband is liable to maintain the child and his wife who have no source of earnings. Therefore, this Court is of the view - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 that the impugned order is required to be modified reducing the amount awarded towards maintenance in favour of the wife and child by Rs.5,000/- each. Therefore, husband has to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to the wife and Rs.10,000/- to the child. Thus the revision petition is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The revision petition is allowed-in-part. (ii) The order that is rendered by the Court of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru in C.Misc.No.555/2016 dated 11.09.2019 is modified directing the revision petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to the first respondent/wife towards maintenance till her lifetime or till her marriage or till change of circumstances if any is established. (iii) The revision petitioner/husband is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance to the second respondent/child till he attains the age of majority. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1665 RPFC No. 102 of 2020 (iv) Maintenance awarded shall be paid from the date of filing of C.Misc.No.555/2016. (v) Revision petitioner/husband to pay all arrears within 3 months. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46