i .«
A . 'D__/0 'Vi"s1:1wajné1than Menoky
~ - 560 038.
52. V K1iTn.Sreesha,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, _
DATED THIS THE am DAY OF }\TOVEMB.Y?5I"{f,.V:2:f}:1é)AV 3 A; J
BEFORQ¥4 % T< [' T
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTIC'E._§.NA.
WRIT PETITION
BETWEEN': V %
Sushama KuI:r1a1'.--P.P. . ..
S/0 Late Chazidrashekar Nair; V.
Aged ab0ut_38v 'V .
R at Puthai1ap.u"1'_ayi'I"'Er°*i:h.ipa1arI1,
"
CALICIJT-2'0.T»VTT , j ...PETITIONER
(By Srti.$iji_ Advs.)
AND;
- W,/p"SuSI1aI11a Kumar. P. P
Aged 3O'3Ec;irs.
R,' a 0.68 / 3, Kadiranapalya
Indtfaizagar Post,
D / 0 Sushama Kumar.P.P
" Aged about Years,
Residing at No.68/ 3,
Kadiranapalya,
Indiranagar Post,
BANGALORE -- 560 038.
groiip this day, the Court made the
C . Kt. " C. _ V _',
"'C:V'th,e_l:Iudgment and Decree dated 16/5/2009 passed in
C Misc. 322/04 on the file of 111 Add}. Pr}. Judge,
Family Court, wherein the Court below has allowed the
3. Master Vishnu,
S/o Sushama Kurnar.P.P
Aged about Years,
Residing at No.68/8,
Kadiranapalya
Indiranagar Post at '
BANGALORE - 560 038.' '~.V,.REsr§oi~Ii2Em's "
(By 83:: Suresh D.Deshpande';'*i.
Adv. for R~l,_____
R-2 82 R3 ._"Sjerv--ed)i. 1' .._ 'V ' " « _ _
This Writ"l}etition is 'rdflleddiiiiiflderilfirticles 226 and
227 of the to set aside the
impugnedo. dated.....V._l£§i.O5.2009 passed in
C.Mise:,VNo_.3?iif2O_f)4 by the HI Additional Family
Judge, to the WP.
Wr1't._.v:vPv'etition coming on for Preliminary
ORDER
petition is filed by the respondent impugning
petition filed by wife and children of the petitioner
herein under Sec. 125 of Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance.
“”‘”‘\
2. The brief facts leading to this petitionj’:a:r_e._:as
under:
The petitioner herein
respondent and 2nd and _ 3″! responden1*._s”»are
children. The marriage 13:,
respondent took I)laI1v{];::’Q\’..,,”()I] not in
dispute that respondent_V:’illos..l2ll» children and
1’€SP01’1d€1’1t The case of the
322 / 04 before the
petitioner herein who is a
businessman has and refused to maintain
_ respofinldent. to as such they filed C.Misc.322/04
rnaihtenance at the rate of Rs.4.000/~» p.m. to
theatre~R¢s§pornaie1it No.1 and Rs.2,ooo/~ p.m. to
g Reshfjondentlll No.2 and 3 and also sought for litigation
V2 V’ of Rs.5,000/~.
3. The Court below has allowed the C.Misc.
No.322/()4 awarding maintenance of Rs.3,000/– p.m. t.o
the 154″» respondent and Rs.1,500/~ p.m. to respondent
Nos.2 and 3 from the date of petition and Rs.2,00’O/– for
litigation expenses. Admittedly the said order is passed
.L~\
4
on 16/5/2009 in (2. Misc. 322/04 which yvas filed the
year 2004. It is also seen from the records that
the pendency of the proceedings in the Court V’
maintenance was paid by the petitionerj It ‘eFase;
of the respondents that since thet’date_iV_they’
separately from petitioner i1<2.s:T2'.O0OV' nothing been V
paid by him towards
4. The learned counsel submits that
though thepre, below, the
petitioner–. ‘ certain amount to
respondents; _ ready and willing to take care
«_ of re:,spondents’;’*–» .’i’__h_ey are comfortably staying with the
‘p.31″entsV”~io’feV respondent in luxury house at
tffiangalore. The 18’, respondent has no
intere.stg_inV coming and staying with petitioner and to
A “it ” discharge her matrimonial obiigation. Since she is
interested in luxury life, she is deliberately staying away
from petitioner who is working as a coolie. It is also
submitted that he does not have sufficient income for
his maintenance, hence he is not in a position to pay
the naaintenance awarded by Family Court.
new
5. The learned counsel for respondent
submits that petitioner herein is a V’
business under the trade nan1eg’D’ub3.i
also made gains in real estate business in CaliCut~ anciis’
financially well placed in S pay ll
maintenance amount. Court Below.
6. This Court counsel for
parties noficéd tliou that there
is failure stay with 111111 and
she house and she is
con1fortah’iy father, there is nothing on
f€C0iZdlVto sl1ow”th.af:Wl1a,e has made attempt to file petition
of conjugal rights with the 15*’ respondent
ar1d”7tov ljgthat respondents would come back to
niatrinionial house and stay with him.
V. ‘7. He has also not filed petition for divorce. This
would lead to presumption that petitioner is neither
interested to take back his wife nor to maintain them by
providing financial support. On going through the
impugned order of Court below it is seen that Court
below has considered all these aspects and has awarded
“*1
maintenance to respondent Nos. 1 to 3. This “of
the opinion that there is neither V’
illegality in the said order passed’ ‘by”~the it
awarding compensation to the respondents,
for interference of this it is V
also seen that this the
petitioner to V towards
maintenance 5 A I petition while
for It is seen that the
petitioner’Vhasj’noVt to comply with the
order therefore the same is
vaeaiedr. Hen-Ce’ there no ground to interfere with the
:th’e»_Court below in awarding compensation to
t”r.es’nonde’n,t to 3.
Aeeotrdingiy, the Writ petition is dismissed with
‘2..f»(§ost._ofV”I2s.2,OO0/A payable by the petitioner to the 19*»
‘ Are:-spdondent within one week from today:
Sdf **
Iiicige
Lr