Karnataka High Court
Sri. Gautham Gururaj Deshpande vs Smt. Anusha G on 26 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:22584
WP No. 7327 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 7327 OF 2025 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. GAUTHAM GURURAJ DESHPANDE
S/O LATE GURURAJ S. DESHPANDE
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT NO.32/6, DIVATGERI GALLI
NEAR RAGHAVENDRA SWAMTY MUTT
BIJAPUR, KARNATAKA -586 101
ALSO AT
C/O SMT. AZMA RAZAK
FLAT NO.502, 5TH FLOOR, 'B' BLOCK,
PRIMUS FEFELECTION APARTMENTS
UDIPALAYA, KAGGALIPURA
KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE -560 082
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SADANANDA G. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by
SUVARNA T SMT. ANUSHA G.,
Location: AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
HIGH D/O GANESH K.S.
COURT OF R/O NO.138, 4TH MAIN
KARNATAKA 2ND STAGE, KPSC LAYOUT
JNANABHARATHI, NAGADEVANAHALLI
BANGALORE SOUTH
BANGALORE -560 056
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAJATH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.SAKSHA BHAGAVAN, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED: 27.02.2025 AT ANNEXURE-A IN MC NO. 6839/2023 ON THE
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:22584
WP No. 7327 of 2025
HC-KAR
FILE OF THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE, BANGALORE
AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION AT ANNEXURE-B
DATED: 12.02.2025 UNDER ORDER XI RULE 5 R/W 151 OF CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IN M.C.NO. 6839/2023 ON THE FILE OF
THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE, BANGALORE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL ORDER
Aggrieved by the orders passed on I.A.No.6 in MC No. 6839/2023 dated 27.02.2025 by the IV Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, the husband is before this court.
2. The wife had filed MC seeking divorce and also sought for permanent alimony of an amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. When the matter was set down for the cross-examination, at that point of time, the husband had come up with the instant I.A No.4. The prayer in the said I.A is to direct the Inspector General of Police or the Principal Secretary, DPAR, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru to produce the annual assessment and liability statement filed by the wife. The reason stated in the affidavit of the said I.A is that the grounds urged by the wife are far from the truth in her petition, so the averments have to be disproved by producing cogent evidence as such, they have -3- NC: 2025:KHC:22584 WP No. 7327 of 2025 HC-KAR come up with the said application. It is also stated that before filing the application, the husband approached the department and as they refused to give the same, he is made to come up with this application. The Family Court by order impugned had dismissed the I.A No. 4. While dismissing the said I.A the Family Court had observed that in the I.A it is stated that the said document is very much important to elicit the truthfulness of the case of the wife. Except this averment, nothing is made out in the affidavit filed in support of the application as to why the documents are necessary, the matter is posted for cross examination of PW-1. The Family Court also observed that the wife had adduced her evidence on 24.06.2024 and with regard to the additional documents no objection is submitted. Ex.P-1 to P-36A came to be marked on behalf of the wife. The matter was adjourned for the cross examination from 20.07.2024 and as the husband had not opted to cross examine PW-1, even after imposing cost, it was taken as cross-examination NIL on 16.12.2024 after granting 5 adjournments. Again, PW-1 is recalled as per order dated 17.01.2025 After recalling of the witness, the present application is filed stating that the asset and liabilities of the wife for the year 2017-18 to 2023-24 are -4- NC: 2025:KHC:22584 WP No. 7327 of 2025 HC-KAR to be summoned either from the IGP or from the Prl. Secretary, DPAR, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru. The family court observed that the wife had not filed any application claiming maintenance, so her assets and liabilities what she had filed before the department have nothing to do with her contentions in the present case. Further family court also observed that the personal information given to the department cannot be sought by the husband in this application. Further, the wife had filed her statement of assets and liabilities in the D.V. Act case, which is pending. The family court had dismissed the application finally, observing that no valid grounds were made out for allowing the application and that the information is not necessary for deciding the present case. Aggrieved thereby the husband is before this court.
3. A coordinate bench of this court on 12.03.2025 had granted stay of all further proceedings in MC No. 6839/2023 pending on the file of the IV additional Principal Judge, family Court, Bangalore.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that when the wife is claiming an amount of Rs.1.00 Crore as -5- NC: 2025:KHC:22584 WP No. 7327 of 2025 HC-KAR maintenance, it is necessary for the husband to establish that what are the assets that the wife is having which were suppressed by the wife. She had made false statements and there is lot of suppression and misrepresentation of facts before this court. Unless and until this application is allowed, the statement of assets and liabilities that are called from the department, the husband would not be in a position to elicit the correct facts. The counsel submits that the finding of the court that calling for the information from the employer amounts to personal information is also not correct. The reasons basing on which the application is dismissed are without any basis and the order needs to be set aside.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/wife submits that the wife had not asked for any interim maintenance and for deciding the permanent alimony, the statement of assets and liabilities of the wife is not necessary. The order passed by the Family Court discloses that the husband had failed to cross-examine the wife and when the cross-examination was closed, after the same was re-opened, they have come up with this application which shows that only -6- NC: 2025:KHC:22584 WP No. 7327 of 2025 HC-KAR with an intention to drag on the proceedings, they have come up with this application. This application is a frivolous application and the family court had passed a reasoned order considering all the aspects and no interference is called for.
6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material record. The MC is filed in the year 2023. In the MC, the wife had sought for the permanent alimony of an amount of Rs.1.00 crore. When the wife seeks alimony of an amount of Rs.1.00 crore, the burden lies on her to establish before the court what is the financial capacity of the husband and whether she is entitled for such an amount or not, basing on the facts and circumstances the Court will decide the same. Even that apart, when the matter is set for the evidence, when already so many opportunities were given to the husband to cross-examine the wife, the husband had chosen not to cross examine and sought time. When the cross- examination was closed, at their request the same was reopened. At that point of time, this application came to be filed.
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:22584 WP No. 7327 of 2025 HC-KAR
7. In the considered opinion of this court, the reasons that are stated in the application cannot be a ground to summon the particulars from the department. The family court had rightly considered all the aspects and rightly held that the said documents are not necessary for deciding the issues between the parties and there are no reasons to interfere.
8. In the light of the above discussion, this court is passing the following:
ORDER i. The writ petition is dismissed.
ii. All pending I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5