Janakamma vs Hanumantha Rao Kulakarni on 1 October, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNRTAKA AT EANGRLQRE

REVISION PETITION(FAMILY cdusrj &o{118 OE éG§6 

DATED THIS THE 13' may or OCTOBER 20béf ".
BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A-s Pacufiaéuaéfx "

BETWEEN:

1

MRS. JANAKRMMA"a 5 _*.2,'g
w/o HANUMANTH'RAo.KUnAKAR§:,* 
AGED ABOUT 48 YmAasffj -'-3
RESIDING AT N61150: '.:_ -«,
13*1mAIN'RQhD.\vg9HAsE_*T~-w»
w.o.¢.*RoADg " ' *V:v .
BANGALORE, *

M:THUN»§_ _ _ ¢_
sflo--HANuMamrH_RAo=KULKRRNI
AGED'ABOUT*;5 *¥EARS

MINOR, REPRESENTED BY

'His NATURAL'NATfiRAL GUARDEAN MOTHER

,&;mWPETITI0NER_
*uRESIDING A$"No.;50

.A »ul$%¥%%§fi.ROAD, V PHASE

",BANGALoaE

m PETITIONERS

(SRf M PRAKRSH FOR N R NAIK & ASSOCIATES,

A'  ,)

H;A&p °

wiéki HANUMRNTHA RAD KULAKARNI
»%xs/0 MALHAR RAG KULAKARNI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

WORKING AS JUNIOR ENGIMEER
O/O THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
GOA ELECTRICITY BORRD, DIVISION XI



OPP. ROY PETROL PUMP
CHASE BUILDING

VASCO~GOA ; 1
 RESPO}_#i£3E_:N,'_I' _

(SMT SUNITHA H SINGH ADV.,)

RPFC FILED U/S 19(1) OF,..fI'HE  

ACT AGAINST THE'. ORDER HATETD: 2i..e._20o§"<335s'sI§;z:"«
IN C.MIS.N0.557/2003 on THE.' FILE or 
ADD}... PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,  '

PARTLY ALLOWING THE FETKTIONV FIl£K}'§fSm"127 =i

CR. P.C. FOR EN}iANCEMEN'1'o«e.VV'0E' MAI_r;rre§JAN;:e AND
SEEKING FURTHER ENI'_%ANCEb§EjN'_'PVv_C5E_v MAINTENANCE.

This RPFC cominfi on fi¢;"nea§Ing this day,
the Court made the fo1iowing:3"»f.L

 R  

.__...-an

The eife ehfi-eon of the respondent have
filed this_ petition;"*éeeking enhancement of

the 5mainteh§noe" ordered by the Pri. Judge,

 ."'Fami'*.1Hy*A"Co1irt, eéifigjaiore in c. Mis. No.55?/03.

at" 2. = The .faets relevant for the purpose of

i"iéfia neglect and the findings arrived at in the

earlier proceedings have attained finality,

K



IO

maintain themselves, I think it will be.-~-just

and proper to enhance the maintenaVr§ce'L:'-._at.o

Rs.l,500/- to the first petiti:oner'V:"t"""}3r¥§§i 

Rs . 1 , 250/ - to the second   

Therefore, I am of the"

petitioners are entitlecfto tIiVe.__e11.§a:_:;;§e§%iéht' as it

stated above. Hence, viaf-:.SWe_r tithe'-Apoyjint in
affirmative and   following

order.

 ....    

The.oetitioe is aiiawed in part.

‘.V{‘_h_Ve ari:Ea”c32.:V_rV’1tV..ofi”mai}1tenance awarded by the

“”t_ria’i””:’CourtA. isflehhianced to Rs.l,500/— to the

and Rs.l,250/—– to the second

petitiionerifleilth effect from the date of the

Vi*..,_o.rder ofthe trial Court.

sd/-3;

Tudge

BN8 .