Karnataka High Court
Krishna Murthy Nookula vs Y.Savitha on 24 May, 2012
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
Bench: Ajit J Gunjal
IN: FT IF I IIGI I ( O
URT OF KARNATA
KA AT 1-IANGAI
ONE
DATEL) Fills J I-I
F 2 F' DAY OF M
AY 2012
BEFORE
111F lION BI F M
R JLSII( F \JIf
JGUNJAL
WRIT PETITION
NO. 1 72 1 2/2009(G
M FC)
BETWEEN:
Krishiia Murtliv
Nookula,
S/oN.K.Seshac1ia
1apathigupta.
\ged 30 years, R/o.
No, 146.
:3' Main Road. (T
hamarajapet.
Baiigalore 560 (>1
.
.. PETITIONER
(By Sri,S I3alakri
shrian Adv, for
M/s Balaii '\ssoeia
tes, Ndvs)
ANT):
Y Sax if he
\V,'o Krishna \'
huihv ookuIa.
I)/O.K.PAathirajU
\et1 39 veals
h/u No I 56 i3 C o
s
S1iati inaar
BaruaInrt
E'ESF( )NDF N
IPx n 'pi I (C SiI( in P
In x Iii inn
)
' '1 U x
I 1 Ft ( )tn1 iii 11 n3
isicl
1 1 1 Uia 1 1
1 ii t tI
d II V x
ni 1 J ( i
i N I
EucL u -
r C N ''Ii2
-2-
Annexure 1)' set-aside the
Impugned order dated
28.05.2009.
This writ petition coming on 1kw
the Court made the following: hearing, this day,
ORDER
In the proceedings between the husband and wife seeking dissolution of the marria ge, an application was moved by the wife seeking reimbursement of the expenses incurred by her towards her children.
Notwithstanding the opposing of the said application by the husband, the learned Family Judge has directed to reimburse the amount expended by the wife.
2. I have heard the learned cou nsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the res pondent.
3. In the present proceedings.
the wife had maintained an application seekin g interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Act for herself and also for her children. The learned Family Judge awarded interim maintenance of Rs.9.000/- to the children and interim -3- maintenance to the wife was rejected, as against which the husband and wile were before this Court. This Court disposed of the said writ petitions by a separate order on 24.05.2012. While calculating the awarding of interim maintenance with reference to various orders passed by this Court, it was found that the wife was paid in excess of what has been determined. Indeed this Court directed that the said excess amount need not be paid back to the husband.
4. Having regard to the fact that the wife can retain the excess amount and the same is required to be adjusted towards the reimbursement of the expenses expended by the petitioner-wife as per the order passed by the Family Court. which is impugned in this writ petition.
I Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
Sd/a JUDGE Sn