Smt Annapurna @ Rajeshwari W/O … vs Shri. Arjun S/O Tuljappa Mali on 20 August, 2008

EN THE HKGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

CIRCUYI' BENCH AT DHARWAD j
DATED THIS THE'. 201% DAY 09 Aways'; '"2:Q§:3--.: . V

BEFORE Tu1jappa Mali,
Age: 33.. years, Occ: Agimflture,

 R10 Savalag,
   
 E)is't: Bagaikot.  RESPONDENT

fié Izmx. 

 



(Respondent served)

This petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P._{3, to
sevasidc the order dated 2.2.2008 in Criminal Rgvisimar 'Petition
No.10?/200? passed by the Fast Track Court,  and

order dated 24.9.2007 in Crl.Misc.No.40/2002  ray .t_;he* ;_
Additional JMFC Court, Jamkhandi,   enhance ihc 

maintenance amount at R3300] -p;m,. 

by allowing the maintcnance pctitipn,  etc.

This petition comm' gyon for   (gay; inc
Courtmade the following: '   V_   " 

 

2%.'  while allowing the petitibn for

  "fhe  petitieners herein, who am wife and

 "  -c§1'~.'«_1._"t msgndent, awaxticd maintenance in a sum of

   to each one of the petitioner. The

 a revision petition chaflcnging the inadequacy

 Ac-f thév.V;{i3,aintcnancc awarded. The mvisional court on the

  that the respondent owns only 25 guntas of land and is

Q £Lj;,x.. 

1 'u'h~_:: petitidnerrsf A' 



3

doing Coolie work confirmed the order of the trial 

d1s3:o1s' ' sed the revision petition filed by the petittoikiéat-é}j'    

3. In the matrixraonial   .15'

petitioner she claimed maintenance  Iaeura   I-*!:I1Iéa:,L

been awarded in the said «As ouch,' the

amount of Rs.'750/- Plus; 133.29%] -=.  Imaizfitenance to
the 1*' petitioner is    regards the 2"'
petitioner it is   going girl aged

about 14    produced Ieoord of rights

to estah:}is1I_   the respondent owns 14 acres of
landed   age of the minor girl am} the

fact that eheauhae been  her studies in a school, the

 "'amoe;1t #0:" Rs,200/Iévtttefiirvazded to her is meager which cannot

 evee   glass of milk every day. As such I enhance

the  1000/- per month. Accordingly, I pass the

  I renewing}

ORDER

The Criminal Revision Petition is partly allowed. The

I claim of 1″ petitioner for enhancement of compensation is

rejected. The claim of the 21*’ petitioraer is allowed and the

yketueekikew

respondent is hereby dimcted to pay majutenanqgat f’Afié’~9f

Rs.1G00]~ per month to the 2114 petitioncr~c1_a.if_ngu1:t1t.V ._ Z

Accoxtiinglfih the crimimaal of ”

Rssooo/-. V
fudge