- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8771 RPFC No. 131 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 131 OF 2023 BETWEEN: ASHOKAN. A., S/O LATE APPUKUTTAN, NOW AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.VISHWA-142, KARAKUSHALA NAGARA, METAGALI, MYSURU DISTRICT-570016. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. AYESHA UNNISA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SALIM ALI KHANS., ADVOCATE) AND: NANMA A. R. D/O ASHOKAN A., NOW AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, SINCE THE RESPONDENT IS A MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8771 RPFC No. 131 of 2023 SMT. ROSELIN JOSEPH, W/O ASHOKAN A. (NOT ADMITTED), AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SHIVAPURA, OPP. TO SERICULTURE OFFICER, MANANDAVADI ROAD, SRIRAMPURA 1ST STAGE, MYSURU-570023. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT- MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN-MOTHER, SERVED-UNREPRESENTED) THIS RPFC FILED U/S.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.MIS.NO.453/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED I ADDL. PRL. FAMILY JUDGE AT MYSURU AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.01.2023 PASSED UNDER SECTION 125 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. 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:8771 RPFC No. 131 of 2023 ORAL ORDER Heard Ms.Ayesha Unnisa, who represent Ms.Salim Ali Khan S., learned counsel on record for petitioner. Though notice was served, respondent who is represented by her mother failed to contest the matter. 2. Challenge in this revision petition is the order that is rendered by the Court of I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru in Crl.Misc.No.453/2022 dated 30.01.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner herein and the mother of the respondent maintained live-in relationship for some time and the said relationship resulted in birth of respondent. Respondent and her mother filed a petition seeking maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month from the petitioner herein. The claim of mother was rejected. But the Family Court directed the petitioner to pay respondent/child a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards her maintenance till completion of her education or till she attains the age of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8771 RPFC No. 131 of 2023 majority whichever is later. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has no source of earning and he himself is depending upon others. Learned counsel also contends that the mother of respondent has got various sources of earnings and therefore she can as well maintain the respondent. Learned counsel thereby seeks to allow the revision petition and thereby set aside the impugned order. 4. When a query was posed by this Court about the occupation of the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was involved in handicraft business and he closed the said business and he is working as Security Guard. When the Court asked learned counsel for the petitioner the place where petitioner is working as Security Guard, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that petitioner left that job too and he is idle. 5. Having considered the financial status of the mother, Family Court declined to grant any maintenance in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8771 RPFC No. 131 of 2023 her favour. Family Court exhibiting its opinion that child is required to be maintained by the petitioner, directed the petitioner to pay the child a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance. Family Court at para 15 of the impugned order discussed in detail about the contents of Ex.P.14 - Registration Certificate issued by the Government of Karnataka in respect of handicrafts business of the petitioner herein by name 'Ambika Handicrafts' and also in respect of Ex.P.15 - Income Tax Returns filed by him. After considering the financial status of both parties i.e. the parents of respondent, Family Court came to a conclusion that petitioner can pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance of the child. Admittedly, respondent/child requires proper food, nutrition, clothing and education. For higher education, much more amount is required. Therefore, this Court is of the view that Family Court did not err in fixing responsibility upon the petitioner to maintain his child i.e. the respondent herein and directing him to pay a sum of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8771 RPFC No. 131 of 2023 Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance. Therefore, this Court holds that this revision petition lacks merits. Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed. In the light of disposal of the revision petition, proceedings in I.A. No.2/2023 are closed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38