CRL.P/4506/2019 of SRI MAHADEVASWAMY S M Vs SMT SUJATHA N C on 23 June 2026

ORDER

DATED 27.10.2018 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA IN CRL.RP.NO.26/2018. IN CRL.P NO. 4506/2019 BETWEEN:

1. SRI MAHADEVASWAMY S M S/O LATE MALLAIAH P C NO.1673, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO.5, 7TH BLOCK,NANDI SAKEERNA, POLICE QUARTERS,AUDUGODI, BENGALURU-560 030. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A SAMPATH, ADVOCATE) AND:

1. SMT SUJATHA N C W/O MAHHADEVASWAMY S M

HC-KAR

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

2. MASTER THEJAS S M S/O MAHADEVASWAMY S M AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT SUJATHA N C

RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 ARE R/AT NO.168/2, WARD NO.7, SHETTIHALLI VILLAGE, CHURCH ROAD,CHANNAPATNA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 160. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAITREYI KRISHNAN,ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE

ORDER

DATED 23.03.2019 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA IN CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.41/2018. IN CRL.P NO. 37/2020 BETWEEN:

1. SUJATHA N C W/O MAHADEVASWAMY S M AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

2. THEJAS S M S/O MAHADEVASWAMY SM AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS,

HC-KAR

PETITION NO.2 IS MINOR AND REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. SUJATHA N C – PETITIONER NO.1

BOTH PETITIONER No.1 AND 2 ARE REISIDING AT NO.168/2, WARD NO.7, SHETTIHALLI VILLAGE, CHURCH ROAD, CHENNAPATNA TOWN, RAMANGARA DISTRICT-562 160.

...PETITIONERS (BY SMT. MAITREYI KRISHNAN.,ADVOCATE) AND:

1. MAHADEVASWAMY S M S/O LATE MALLAIAH, PC NO. 1673, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/A NO.5, 7TH BLOCK, NANDI SAKEERNA, POLICE QUARTERS, ADUGODI, BENGALURU-560030. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A SAMPATH,ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO MODIFY THE

ORDER

DATED 23.03.2019 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA IN CRL.RP.NO.41/2018 SO AS TO GRANT MAINTENANCE OF RS.8,000/- TO THE PETITIONER NO.1 1 FROM 02.02.2007 i.e. THE DATE OF EPTITION FILED IN CRL.MISC.NO.10/2007 ORDER DATED 26.05.2018 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.,

HC-KAR

CHANNAPATNA.

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for revision petitioner and the counsel for respondent in all the petitions.

2. Crl.RP.No.651/2018 and Crl.P.No.37/2020 are filed by the wife challenging the order of the appellate Court in setting aside the amount given by the trial court an amount of Rs.1,000/- under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and seeking enhancement of maintenance from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.8,000/-.

3. The other two petitions filed by the husband, namely, Crl.P.No.8891/2018 challenging the order of the trial Court granting an amount of Rs.4,000/- to the child from January 2010 till he attains the age of majority and

HC-KAR

Crl.P.No.4506/2019 challenging the award of maintenance of Rs.3,000/- under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. proceedings.

4. Having heard the respective counsels, insofar as Crl.RP.No.651/2018 is concerned, the appellate Court has committed an error in setting aside the order granting the maintenance amount of Rs.1,000/- and the same requires to be set aside so also the amount granted is only a nominal amount. As such, the husband is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards maintenance as directed by the trial Court with arrears. With regard to granting of maintenance to the son is concerned, an amount of Rs.4,000/- granted by the trial Court appears to be very just and reasonable and question of setting aside the same does not arise. However, this Court while considering the revision petition, it was modified to Rs.3,000/- while passing an interim order and the said order requires to be modified as Rs.4,000/- by considering the cost of living and the said order was passed in favour of child that too, now he attains the age of majority i.e., 18 years. Hence,

HC-KAR

the award made by the trial Court is just and reasonable and the husband is directed to pay maintenance in favour of his son to the tune of Rs.4,000/- and also to pay the arrears at the rate of Rs.4,000/-. However, the amount was already paid and it has to be adjusted towards further payment of maintenance with arrears.

5. Crl.P.No.4506/2019 is filed challenging the award of maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to the wife and the same is requires to be modified. When the matter was heard on previous occasion by this Court, it was verified that presently, the husband is getting gross salary of Rs.60,000/- p.m. and after deductions, he would get around Rs.50,000/- p.m. Further, the counsel appearing for the revision petitioner also not disputes the said salary and the same may be reconsidered towards rent as well as the maintenance amount. Earlier an amount of Rs.3,000/- is awarded towards maintenance and Rs.3,250/- towards rent. By considering the said factual aspects, it is appropriate to enhance the same to the tune of

HC-KAR

Rs.15,000/- payable from today and if any arrears with regard to maintenance of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.3,250/- towards rent, the husband has to pay the balance amount to the wife forthwith and the same is not enhanced till date.

6. The counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the child is still pursuing his education and he intends to do law course. Therefore, the husband is directed to provide and meet the educational expenses of his son who is not working though attained the age of majority and still pursuing his education. With these observations, all the petitions are disposed of.

Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

SSD