Karnataka High Court
RPFC/242/2022 of SMT KUMARI C Vs MR ANAND on 19 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010466322022 NC: 2026:KHC:51425 RPFC No. 242 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 242 OF 2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT KUMARI C., W/O MR. ANANDA AGED ABOUT 31
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 242 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT KUMARI C.,
W/O MR. ANANDA
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
2.
KUMARI VIDHYA
D/O MR. ANANDA
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS,
MINOR REPRESENTED BY
HER MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN
SMT.KUMARI C.,
BOTH ARE R/AT SHIVAIAH
NO.3, 13TH BLOCK
MAHADEVPURA
MYSURU CITY-571 415
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.KESHAVA CHANDRA S.P., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.SHIVARAMU H.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR.ANANDA
S/O KULLANAYKA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/AT METIKUPPE ROAD
HANUMANTHANAGAR
H.D.KOTE TOWN
H.D.KOTE TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT-571 121
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.V.F.KUMBAR, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
SUVARNA T
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS RPFC FILED U/S.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS
ACT,
AGAINST
THE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 21.04.2018 PASSED IN Crl.MISC.NO.3/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU. PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/S.125 OF Cr.P.C FOR MAINTENANCE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL ORDER
Aggrieved by the order dated 21.04.2018 passed in C.Misc.No.3/2016 by the Prl. Judge, Family Court at Mysuru, the petitioner/wife is before this Court.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth as husband and wife.
3. The wife filed an application seeking maintenance of an amount of Rs.15,000/- for herself and for the child. The Family Court, by order impugned had granted an amount of Rs.3,000/- to the child. But no amount of maintenance was awarded to the wife. It is the case of the husband that the wife is living in adultery, and certain evidence has been placed before the court.
HC-KAR
4. This Court has perused the order. The Court considered the evidence, and there is absolutely no finding by the Family Court that the wife is living in adultery or that she is not entitled to maintenance. The Family Court goes on discussing the evidence, but no finding is given. Unless and until the court records a finding, the Family Court cannot deny maintenance to the wife. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that the order impugned needs to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded back. However, as far as the child is concerned, shall continue to pay. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following:
ORDER
i. The order dated 21.04.2018 passed in C.Mis.No.3/2016 by the Prl. Judge, Family Court at Mysuru is set aside, and the matter is remanded back to the Family Court. ii. The Family Court shall consider the case of the petitioner/wife afresh in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders.
iii. As far as the maintenance that is granted to the child is concerned, the husband shall continue to pay.
HC-KAR
iv. Accordingly, the RPFC is allowed.
v. All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
PKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41 *AK