Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22884
RPFC No. 171 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 25 DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO.171 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
SRI. RANGARAJU R.
S/O RANGASHAYAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT CHANDRESHWARI TEMPLE ROAD,
A. K. COLONY, OORUKERE VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 106.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V. B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. R. PADMAVATHI
D/O R. RANGARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
2. SRI. R. HARSHAVARDHANA
S/O R. RANGARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS,
MINOR: REP. BY HIS MOTHER
SMT. LOKAMMA W/O RANGARAJU R.
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
BOTH THE RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 ARE
R/AT OORUKERE VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 106.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RENUKA DEVI A. S., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
Digitally signed
by LUCYGRACE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22884
RPFC No. 171 of 2021
HC-KAR
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE
FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
DATED 14.12.2021 PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO.63/2020 BY THE
ST
1 ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT TUMAKURU,
THEREBY DISMISS THE PETITION IN CRL. MISC. NO.63/2020
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL ORDER
The husband against whom liability is fixed to
maintain his children, is before this Court challenging the
responsibility imposed. The order under challenge is the
one that is rendered by the Court of I Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, Tumakuru in Crl.Misc.No.63/2020
dated 14.12.2021.
2. Wife, minor daughter, who is respondent No.1
herein and minor son, who is respondent No.2 herein, of
the revision petitioner filed a petition under Section 125 of
Cr.P.C., claiming maintenance. Wife claimed a sum of
Rs.5,000/- per month and respondents herein Rs.10,000/-
each per month towards maintenance.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22884
RPFC No. 171 of 2021
HC-KAR
3. Rejecting the claim of the wife, Family Court
directed revision petitioner to pay children i.e.,
respondents herein a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month each
from the date of filing of the petition till they attain the
age of majority and also Rs.3,000/- towards litigation
expenses.
4. Heard Sri.V.B.Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for
the revision petitioner. Though fair opportunity was given
to the respondents to make their submission on the merits
of the matter, they could not availed the opportunity
granted.
5. Arguing on the merits of the matter, learned
counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the
revision petitioner is the father of the respondents.
Respondents are residing with their mother. Mother of the
respondents left the company of the revision petitioner
without justifiable cause and she started living separately
along with the respondents herein. She foisted false case
against the petitioner. The wife of the petitioner i.e., the
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22884
RPFC No. 171 of 2021
HC-KAR
mother of the respondents has got her own source of
earnings and she is also maintaining the respondents well.
Therefore, there is no requirement for the petitioner to pay
any sum to respondents towards maintenance. That apart,
petitioner is suffering from Asthma and therefore he is
unable to do any work. He, who due to ill-health is not in a
position to maintain himself cannot maintain his children
i.e., the respondents herein. But, without considering
these aspects, Family Court directed the petitioner to pay
huge sum of Rs.5,000/- per month each to respondents
and therefore, this revision petition is filed. Learned
counsel thereby sought to set aside the impugned order.
6. The version of the wife of the petitioner is that the
petitioner is maintaining illicit intimacy with one
Gowramma and he deserted her and her children. On the
other hand, the version of the revision petitioner is that his
wife is residing with one Beeranakallu Kantharaju, a rowdy
of Tumakuru. However, they failed to establish their pleas
by producing any cogent and convincing material before
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22884
RPFC No. 171 of 2021
HC-KAR
the Family Court. No doubt, PW.1 i.e., the wife of the
petitioner during the course of cross-examination when
she examined herself as PW.1 admitted that she is
working in Nisha Garments and earns Rs.10,000/- per
month. However, that does not mean that she has got the
sole responsibility to maintain the children. Also, a sum of
Rs.10,000/- will not be enough for her to maintain herself,
to impart education to the respondents and to provide
good food and to attend other necessities. Petitioner
though tried to escape from liability to maintain his
children on the ground that he is suffering from Asthma,
no convincing material is produced to show that the said
ill-health prevents him from doing any work in total and
thereby he is deprived of earning anything.
7. Family Court, taking into consideration the totality
of the facts and circumstances, directed the petitioner to
pay his children i.e., the respondents herein a sum of
Rs.5,000/- per month each till they attain the age of
majority. Undoutedly, both the respondents have attained
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:22884
RPFC No. 171 of 2021
HC-KAR
the age of majority as of now. Hence, this Court is of the
view that there are no grounds to interfere with the
findings given by the Family Court by which maintenance
was granted in favour of respondents. Resultantly
following:-
ORDER
i. The revision petition stands dismissed.
ii. Arrears if any shall be cleared within three
months.
In the light of the disposal of revision petition, the
proceedings in I.A No.1/2021 are closed.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
LG
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1
CT:SI