Karnataka High CourtFamily LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Karnataka HC Raises 7-Year-Old Daughter’s Maintenance To ₹15,000 Monthly Till Marriage, While Keeping Wife’s At ₹10,000

SRI MANOJ KUMAR S/O MOHANRAO HILALPUREv.SMT POOJA W/O MANOJKUMAR HILALPURE

Karnataka HC Raises 7-Year-Old Daughter’s Maintenance To ₹15,000 Monthly Till Marriage, While Keeping Wife’s At ₹10,000. SRI MANOJ KUMAR S/O MOHANRAO HILALPURE vs SMT POOJA W/O MANOJKUMAR HILALPURE. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the Family Court’s award of ₹10,000 per month to the wife should be set aside or enhanced.

The court held

The husband’s revision was dismissed, and the wife’s revision was partly allowed.

It also directed

The wife’s maintenance of ₹10,000 per month was confirmed; the child’s maintenance was enhanced from ₹8,000 to ₹15,000 per month, payable from the date of the petition until her marriage.

01Facts

The husband and wife married on 19 February 2017 and have a daughter.

pp. 4–8

They had lived separately since 2019.

pp. 4–8

The wife sought maintenance for herself and the child under Section 125 CrPC, alleging that the husband, an Assistant Professor pursuing a Ph.D., had substantial income and landed property.

pp. 4–8

The husband disputed his income and claimed that the wife was employed and that he was then unemployed.

pp. 4–8

The Family Court awarded monthly maintenance of ₹10,000 to the wife and ₹8,000 to the child from the date of the petition.

pp. 4–8

The husband challenged the award to the wife; the wife sought enhancement for both claimants.

pp. 4–8

02Issues

i.Whether the Family Court’s award of ₹10,000 per month to the wife should be set aside or enhanced.

pp. 7–10

ii.Whether the monthly maintenance awarded to the minor child should be enhanced.

pp. 10–11

03Law Applied

The proceedings arose under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides a remedy for maintenance to a wife and child who cannot maintain themselves.

pp. 2–3

The revisions were brought under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984.

pp. 2–3

The Court applied the principle that a husband has a responsibility to maintain his wife and child and may assess his earning capacity from the circumstances, including his qualifications, where precise proof of income is unavailable.

pp. 10–11

Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Family Courts Act, 1984 Section 19

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125

04Reasoning

The wife could not establish the husband’s precise income or identify where he was working, but his Ph.D. qualification was undisputed.

pp. 10–11

The Court considered the Family Court’s award of ₹10,000 per month to the wife reasonable and declined to enhance it.

pp. 10–11

As to the child, it considered ₹8,000 per month inadequate and increased the amount to ₹15,000, without setting out a separate calculation of the child’s needs.

pp. 10–11

05Holding

The husband’s revision was dismissed, and the wife’s revision was partly allowed.

p. 11

The wife’s maintenance of ₹10,000 per month was confirmed; the child’s maintenance was enhanced from ₹8,000 to ₹15,000 per month, payable from the date of the petition until her marriage.

p. 11
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRI MANOJ KUMAR S/O MOHANRAO HILALPUREvsSMT POOJA W/O MANOJKUMAR HILALPURE

Karnataka High Court · October 09, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment