Smt Bharathi M v. Sri Gangadhara Gowda H P

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO.31152 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SMT BHARATHI M., W/O GANGADHARA GOWDA H.P. D/O MARAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O NO.3, 3RD CROSS, OPP GOVT SCHOOL ROAD, AVALAHALLI, BENGALURU ROAD, GOVT ELECTRIC FACTORY, BENGALURU-560026. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GANGADHAR G.D., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI GANGADHARA GOWDA H P S/O LATE PAPANNA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, C/O ANGADI BYRE GOWDA, R/O. HANHCIPURA VILLAGE, AMRUTHURU HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 111. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HEGDE S. RAMAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE) by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM II ADDL. PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE IN M.C. NO. 866/2020 AND MODIFIED THE ORDER DATED 16/07/2024 ON IA NO. II AND GRANT MAINTENANCE AS PRAYED IN THE APPLICATION ANNEXURE-E.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri.Gangadhar.G.D, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Hegde.S.Ramakrishna, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶2Seeking the Court to modify the order that is rendered by the Court of II Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengauru on IA No.II in MC No.866/2020 dated 16.07.2024, this writ petition is filed.

¶3The petitioner herein who is legally wedded wife of the respondent filed IA No.II invoking Section 24 of the

Hindu Marriage Act, seeking interim maintenance of Rs.50,000/- per month from the respondent. The Family Court through the impugned order directed the respondent to pay petitioner a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month towards interim maintenance of the petitioner and their children.

¶4Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent runs a poultry farm and earns huge amount. Petitioner is under obligation to maintain three children i.e., one daughter and two sons born out of the lawful wedlock. As she was not in a position to eke out her livelihood and to maintain the children, she claimed maintenance. But Family Court directed respondent to pay meager sum towards interim maintenance and aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed. Learned counsel thereby seeks to pass necessary orders.

¶5Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that petitioner is also an employee. Respondent is

unemployed. He has no source of earnings. That apart, daughter attained the age of majority and her marriage is also performed. Even both the sons attained the age of majority. Therefore, petitioner has no obligation either to maintain the daughter or the sons. Thus, there are no grounds for enhancement.

¶6In the affidavit given disclosing assets and liabilities, the petitioner made a clear mention that she works at Vinayaka Hospital, Bengaluru as a Receptionist and earns Rs.10,000/- per month. There is no denial of the fact that daughter attained the age of majority and she also got married. Likewise there is no denial of the fact that both the sons attained the age of majority. No material was produced by the petitioner before the Family Court to show that respondent maintains a poultry farm. Family Court taking into consideration the totality of facts and circumstances directed respondent to pay petitioner a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month towards interim maintenance for the maintenance of the petitioner and children.

¶7Both the learned counsel submits that trial in MC No.866/2020 is in progress and the case will be disposed of very soon.

¶8Having regard to the said submission made and as this Court does not find any grounds whatsoever to interfere with the findings given in the impugned order, this Court considers desirable to dismiss the writ petition.

Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 77