Karnataka High Court
MFA/1396/2026 of VENKATARAJU BADANAPURI Vs MISS.LAVIKA B @ CHANDANA on 5 June 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:26754-DB MFA No. 1396 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1396 OF 2026 (FC) BETWEEN: VENKATARAJU BADANAPURI S/O
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1396 OF 2026 (FC)
BETWEEN:
VENKATARAJU BADANAPURI
S/O PALAKANNAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT,
CHIRALA DIVISION/HEAD QUARTERS,
GUNTUR CIRCLE,
ANDHRA PRADESH 522 002
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHIVAREDDY K. N., ADVOCATE)
AND:
MISS.LAVIKA B @ CHANDANA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 9, CHANDANA NILAYA,
21ST CROSS, 24TH MAIN ROAD,
J P NAGAR, V PHASE,
BANGALORE 560078
…RESPONDENT
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.11.2025
PASSED IN O.S.NO. 255/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE IV
ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED UNDER SECTION 20(3)
READ WITH SECTION 21(v) OF THE HINDU ADOPTION AND
MAINTENANCE ACT.
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
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.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The present appeal has been filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act impugning the judgment and decree dated 18.11.2025 passed by the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, in O.S.No.255/2018, filed by the respondent herein.
2. The appellant is the father of the respondent. The marriage between the parents of the respondent i.e., appellant and one Smt. Geetha was dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') in M.C.No.858/2001 by a decree of divorce dated 12.04.2002. The appellant had paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as permanent alimony to Smt. Geetha. Except offering Rs.1,50,000/- as permanent alimony to his wife, the appellant never contributed
HC-KAR
anything towards education and marriage expenses of the respondent i.e, their daughter. The respondent therefore, filed the aforesaid suit claiming maintenance towards education and marriage expenses.
3. The learned Family Court after considering the evidence on record has come to the conclusion that on the basis of the income of the appellant that he should be required to pay Rs.4,00,000/- towards educational expenses and Rs.8,00,000/- towards marriage expenses as well as Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses, to the respondent, who is none other than the daughter of the appellant.
4. It is no doubt true that the appellant has never contributed towards the education or other expenses to the respondent, except paying Rs.1,50,000/- to the wife, in terms of the decree of divorce granted under Section 13B of the Act. Since the appellant is the father of the respondent, the Family Court has considered educational and marriage expenses as per his status and awarded
HC-KAR
Rs.4,00,000/- and Rs.8,00,000/- respectively to the respondent.
5. We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and decree dated 18.11.2025, wherein an order for meagrer maintenance of Rs.12,00,000/- is passed, to be paid to his own daughter, as the appellant is working as an Executive Engineer in the Irrigation Department of the State of Karnataka.
6. In view thereof, we dismiss the present miscellaneous first appeal, being devoid of merits.
7. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration, hence stand disposed of.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
NG CT:SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16