PRIYA vs BASAVARAJ
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201188 OF 2018 (FC)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201220 OF 2018 (FC-DIV)
IN MFA No. 201188/2018
BETWEEN:
PRIYA W/O BASAVARAJ BIRADAR,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: DHUMAKANAL, TQ : INDI
DIST: VIJAYAPURA.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VINAYAK APTE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
BASAVARAJ S/O SHIVANAGOUDA BIRADAR,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: HEGADIHAL,
TQ: DIST: VIJAYAPURA – 586 101.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. REKHA PATIL, ADVOCATE, ON BEHALF OF
APPEARING FOR
SRI G.G.CHAGASHETTI AND
SRI L.T. PUJARI, ADVOCATES)
Digitally signed
by B NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1)OF FAMILY
COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET-
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2018 PASSED IN
M.C.NO.8/2017 ON THE FILE OF PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,
VIJAYAPUR BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND TO PASS SUCH
OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE
DEEMS FIT.
IN MFA NO. 201220/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI. BASAVARAJ
S/O SHIVANAGOUDA BIRADAR,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: HEGADIHAL VILLAGE,
TQ: DIST: VIJAYAPURA – 586 101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. REKHA PATIL, ADVOCATE, ON BEHALF OF
APPEARING FOR
SRI. G.G.CHAGASHETTI &
SRI L. T. PUJARI., ADVOCATES)
AND:
SMT. PRIYA W/O BASAVARAJ BIRADAR,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: DHUMAKANLA, TQ : INDI
DIST: VIJAYAPURA – 586101.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VINAYAK APTE , ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1)OF FAMILY
COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY
SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED
04.04.2018 PASSED IN M.C.NO.8/2017 BY THE LEARNED
PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT VIJAYAPRUA, IN SO FAR AS
DIRECTING THE APPELLANT TO PAY RS.4,00,000/- TO THE
RESPONDENT /WIFE TOWARDS HER PERMANENT ALIMONY.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
These two appeals are arising out of the judgment
and decree dated 04.04.2018 passed in MC No.8/2017 by
the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura
(‘ Family Court ’ for short).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to based on their rankings before the Family
Court. The petitioner is the husband and the respondent is
the wife.
3. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this
appeal are as follows:
3.1. The petitioner filed a petition under Section
13(1)(i), (i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
is the case of the petitioner that, the marriage of the
petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on
02.05.2004 at Sri. Maruti Temple, Adarsh Nagar,
Vijayapura as per the customs prevailing in their
community. After marriage, they led a happy marital life
at Hegadihal Village of Vijayapura Taluk and District. The
brother and father of the petitioner are residing at
Vijayapura. The respondent insisted the petitioner to make
a house at Vijayapura City and she refused to reside at
Hegadihal Village. The petitioner refused to do so. The
respondent started abusing the petitioner in filthy
language and shown disrespect to the petitioner and his
family members, which caused mental agony. The
respondent also ill-treated the petitioner. It was contended
that, the respondent went to her parents' house at
Dhumakanal Village of Indi Taluk and delivered a female
child on 08.10.2009, and thereafter, she had not returned
to the house of the petitioner to lead marital life. The
respondent had deserted the petitioner without any
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
reasons; she was not interested to lead a happy marital
life with him and failed to discharge her marital obligation.
The petitioner and the respondent are residing separately
for a period of 7 years. The respondent had filed a suit in
OS No.31/2013 seeking decree for maintenance, which
came to be decreed and an appeal is preferred by the
petitioner in MFA No.201730/2015 before this Court. The
father of the respondent was not ready to send the
respondent to the house of the petitioner to lead happy
marital life. Hence, a cause of action arose for the
petitioner to file the petition before the Family Court.
3.2. The respondent filed a statement of objections
denying the averments made in the petition, except
admitting the performance of marriage and she giving
birth to a female child. It was contended that, the parents
of the petitioner forcibly took the respondent to Hegadihal
Village and made them to live in a small house with them,
and the parents of the petitioner used to force the
respondent to work in the field and to carry out the
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
inexperienced and dangerous work of applying pesticides
to the grape crops etc. Hence, prays to dismiss the
petition.
3.3. The petitioner, to substantiate his case,
examined himself as PW1, and no documents were
marked. The respondent, to prove her defence, examined
herself as DW1 and marked three documents as Exs.D1 to
D3.
3.4. The Family Court, after recording the evidence,
framed the following points for consideration:
“1) Whether the petitioner proves that, he is entitled
for dissolution of marriage with the respondent
solemnized on 02.05.2004 at Maruti Temple,
Adarsh Nagar, Vijayapura?
2) What orders or decree?”
3.5. The Family Court, after hearing both sides and
assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, answered
point No.1 in the affirmative and point No.2 as per the
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
final order. The petition was allowed vide judgment dated
04.04.2018 on the ground of cruelty and desertion, and
the marriage of the petitioner and the respondent was
dissolved by decree of divorce. The Family Court has held
that, the respondent is entitled for permanent alimony for
her future life to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- from the
petitioner.
4. The petitioner, aggrieved by the grant of
permanent alimony, preferred an appeal in MFA
No.201220/2018 and the respondent, aggrieved by the
impugned judgment and decree, preferred an appeal in
MFA No.201188/2018.
5. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent submits
that, the Family Court has committed an error in passing
the impugned judgment. He further submits that, the
petitioner has no love and affection towards the minor
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
child. During the course of conciliation, the petitioner did
not agree to lead a happy marital life. He submits that, the
petitioner has failed to prove the cruelty and desertion. He
submits that, the permanent alimony granted by the
Family Court is very meager, and prays to enhance the
same. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the
appeal filed by the respondent and dismiss the appeal filed
by the petitioner.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,
that the Family Court, while allowing the petition, has held
that the respondent is entitled for permanent alimony for
her future life to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- from the
petitioner. To the said extent, the judgment passed by
the Family Court is arbitrary and erroneous. Hence, on this
ground, he prays to dismiss the appeal filed by the
respondent and allow the appeal filed by the petitioner.
8. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
9. The point that would arise for our consideration
is as follows:
Whether the parties to the appeals prove that
the impugned judgment and decree passed by the
Family Court is arbitrary and perverse?
10. There is no dispute in regard to the marriage of
the petitioner with the respondent which was solemnized
as per the customs prevailing in their community. The
petitioner made an allegation against the respondent that
after the marriage the petitioner led marital life at
Hegadihal Village. Thereafter, the respondent started
insisting the petitioner to make a house at Vijayapura so
that they can shift from Hegadihal to Vijayapura and lead
marital life, for which the petitioner refused. The
respondent started abusing the petitioner in filthy
language and stared showing disrespect to the petitioner.
11. The petitioner, in order to prove his case,
examines himself as PW1 and he reiterated the petition
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
averments in the examination-in-chief. During the cross-
examination, it was elicited that, his wife gave birth to a
female child during 2009. He further deposed that,
himself and his parents went to the parental house of the
respondent, to bring her back; she has flatly refused to
join the petitioner. Conciliation was held before the Family
Court and the Family Court instructed the petitioner to
make a house at Vijayapura and stay with his wife and
child. Accordingly, he made a house at Vijayapura, but the
respondent did not turn up to lead a happy marital life. He
further deposed that, he was always ready to reside at
Vijayapura and ready to take the respondent and child
along with him, but the respondent is not ready to join the
company of the petitioner.
12. In rebuttal, the respondent wife was examined
as RW1. She reiterated the averments made in the
statement of objections in the examination-in-chief.
During the cross-examination, it was elicited that, she was
staying away from the petitioner since 6 years and she
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
was residing in her parental house. During the cross-
examination, it was suggested to RW1 whether she was
ready to lead marital life with the petitioner. She had
given a reply by saying that she is not willing to live with
the petitioner.
13. The Family Court, considering the entire
material on record and as the respondent is not willing to
live with the petitioner, has held that the respondent has
deserted the petitioner without a reasonable cause and
she has filed a suit in OS No.31/2013 for maintenance.
The Family Court has also recorded the demeanor of the
respondent that, the very attitude of the respondent
reflects that she has not discharged her marital obligation
towards the petitioner.
14. Even before this Court, during the course of
arguments, the parties were present before the Court and
this Court had asked the respondent whether she is willing
to join the company of the petitioner, she had flatly
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
refused and she had stated that she is not interested to
lead marital life with the petitioner.
15. The Family Court, after appreciating the entire
evidence on record, has rightly passed the impugned
judgment. Hence, we do not find any error in the
impugned judgment.
16. Insofar as alimony is concerned, the Family
Court has granted a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- which is very
meager. As the petitioner is an Agriculturalist and having
agricultural lands, we are of the opinion that the
respondent is entitled for permanent alimony of
Rs.15,00,000/- from the petitioner for her future life.
17. In view of the above discussion, we answer
point for consideration partly in the affirmative.
Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i. MFA No.201188/2018 is allowed-in-part ;
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10435-DB
MFA No. 201188 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 201220 of 2018
CNR: KAHC030043802018
ii. MFA No.201220/2018 is dismissed ;
iii. The impugned judgment and decree dated
04.04.2018 passed in MC No.8/2017 by the
Family Court is hereby modified ;
iv. The respondent is entitled for permanent
alimony for her future life to the tune of
Rs.15,00,000/- from the petitioner;
v. The petitioner is directed to deposit the
aforesaid amount of permanent alimony within
two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified
copy of this order, failing which, the petitioner
will not be entitled for the benefit of the
impugned judgment passed by the Family
Court;
vi. Pending IA(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
PA
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 28 | Ct:pk