Karnataka High Court
Smt. Roashanbi And Ors vs Kutubuddin on 14 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882
RPFC No. 200083 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mrs JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO.200083 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. ROASHANBI
W/O KHUTUBUDDIN TEGGINMANI
AGE: 35 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD DUTY,
R/O. DODIHLA VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST. VIJAYAPUR.
2. KUMARI NASAREEN
D/O KHUTUBUDDIN TEGGINMANI
AGE: 8 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
3. KUMARI ALFIYA
D/O KHUTUBUDDIN TEGGINMANI
AGE: 5 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
Digitally signed
by SWETA
KULKARNI 4. KUMARI RUKAYA
Location: High
Court of
D/O KHUTUBUDDIN TEGGINMANI
Karnataka AGE: 3 YEARS, OCC: NIL
SINCE PETITIONER NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINORS,
HENCE PRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL
GUARDIAN AND MOTHER, I.E. PETITIONER NO.1
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. PATIL SHANTABAI SUBHASH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI D. P. AMBEKAR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882
RPFC No. 200083 of 2018
AND:
KUTUBUDDIN
S/O SAHEBLAL TEGGINMANI
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. DODIHAL VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST.VIJAYAPUR-586101.
...RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED)
THIS RPFC IS FILED U/S. 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS
ACT, RRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS; ALLOW THIS REVISION
PETITION BY MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 16.08.2018 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. PRL.
JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, VIJAYAPUR IN CRL.MISC.NO.514/2017
AND FURTHER ENHANCE THE MAINTENANCE AMOUNT AS
CLAIMED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE COURT BELOW.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner No.1 - wife is assailing the order dated 16.08.2018 passed by the I-Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura [for short, 'the Family Court'] in Crl.Misc.No.514/2017, wherein, the Family Court partly allowed the petition filed by the wife under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., directing the respondent - -3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882 RPFC No. 200083 of 2018 husband to pay maintenance of Rs.1,500/- per month to petitioner No.1 from the date of petition during her life time or till she gets re-married, whichever is earlier and further directed the respondent- husband to pay Rs.500/- per month each to petitioner Nos.2 to 4.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Though the respondent is served, he has chosen to remain absent.
3. Petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance of Rs.20,000/- to the wife and Rs.10,000/- each to petitioner Nos.2 to 4. It is averred that the husband has willfully neglected to maintain her, inspite the husband having sufficient means. It is the case of the wife that the husband is owning agricultural land and he is getting income of not less than Rs.15 lakh per annum.
4. The respondent appeared and filed his objections denying the averments made in the petition. -4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882 RPFC No. 200083 of 2018
5. The Family Court framed points for consideration and at para-19 held that the respondent is working as a coolie and is getting Rs.1,500/- per month and he is a disabled person and in the left leg he limps and considering the cross-examination where the husband stated that he is not having job and the disability certificate, the Family Court ordered maintenance of Rs.1,500/- to the wife and Rs.500/- each to petitioner Nos.2 to 4.
6. The Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha and Others1(Rajnesh) has given guidelines wherein the Family Court dealing with maintenance proceedings, has to pass specific order directing the parties to file their affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities and then pass a reasoned order granting maintenance. The guidelines issued by the Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh (supra) read as under: 1
(2021) 2 SCC324 -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882 RPFC No. 200083 of 2018 "72.1. (a) The Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities annexed at Enclosures I, II and III of this judgment, as may be applicable, shall be filed by the parties in all maintenance proceedings, including pending proceedings before the Family Court/District Court/Magistrate's Court concerned, as the case may be, throughout the country;
72.2. (b) The applicant making the claim for maintenance will be required to file a concise application accompanied with the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets:
72.3. (c) The respondent must submit the reply along with the Affidavit of Disclosure within a maximum period of four weeks. The courts may not grant more than two opportunities for submission of the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities to the respondent. If the respondent delays in filing the reply with the affidavit, and seeks more than two adjournments for this purpose the court may consider exercising the power to strike off the defence of the respondent, if the conduct is found to be wilful and contumacious in delaying the proceedings. On the failure to file the affidavit within the prescribed time the Family Court may proceed to decide the application for maintenance on the basis of the affidavit filed by the applicant and the pleadings on record;
72.4. (d) The above format may be modified by the court concerned, if the exigencies of a case require the same. It would be left to the judicial discretion of the court concerned to issue necessary directions in this regard.
72.5. (e) If apart from the information contained in the Affidavits of Disclosure, any further information is -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882 RPFC No. 200083 of 2018 required, the court concerned may pass appropriate orders in respect thereof.
72.6. (f) If there is any dispute with respect to the declaration made in the Affidavit of Disclosure, the aggrieved party may seek permission of the court to serve interrogatories, and seek production of relevant documents from the opposite party under Order 11 CPC. On filing of the affidavit, the court may invoke the provisions of Order 10 CPC or Section 165 of the Evidence Act 1872, if it considers it necessary to do so.
The income of one party is often nit within the knowledge of the other spouse. The court may invoke Section 106 of the Evidence Act, 1872 if necessary, since the income, assets and liabilities of the spouse are within the personal knowledge of the party concerned.
72.7. (g) If during the course of proceedings, there is a change in the financial status of any party, or there is a change of any relevant circumstances or if some new information comes to light, the party may submit an amended/supplementary affidavit, which would be considered by the court at the time of final determination.
72.8. (h) The pleadings made in the applications for maintenance and replies filed should be responsible pleadings; if false statements and misrepresentations are made, the court may consider initiation of proceeding under Section 340 CrPC, and for contempt of court.
72.9. (i) In case the parties belong to the economically weaker sections ("EWS"), or are living below the poverty line ("BPL"), or are casual labourers the requirement of filing the affidavit would be dispensed with.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882 RPFC No. 200083 of 2018 72.10(j.) The Family Court/District Court/Magistrate's Court concerned must make an endeavour to decide the IA for interim maintenance by a reasoned order, within a period of four to six months at the latest, after the Affidavits of Disclosure have been filed before the court.
72.11. (k) A professional Marriage Counsellor must be made available in every Family Court."
7. A perusal of the records indicate that the Family Court, while passing the impugned order, has not taken the affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities. The affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities shall be filed by both the parties in compliance with the directions given by the Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh stated supra. In the said circumstances, the impugned order warrants interference by this Court. However, looking into the fact that the Family Court has directed certain amount of maintenance to the wife and children, this Court deems it appropriate to continue the maintenance ordered by the Family Court pending consideration of the Crl.Misc. as the petitioners should not be put to destitution and vagrancy for the procedural lapse on the part of the Family Court. -8-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3882 RPFC No. 200083 of 2018 In the said circumstances, this Court pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The Revision Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The matter is remitted back to the Family Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
(iii) The petitioner and the respondent to file disclosure of assets and liabilities by way of an affidavit as envisaged in the case of Rajnesh stated supra.
(iv) As the interim maintenance, the respondent
- husband continue to pay maintenance of Rs.1,500/- to petitioner No.1 and Rs.500/-
each to petitioner Nos.2 to 4. The awarding of maintenance is only by way of an interim arrangement and the Family Court to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE SWK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27 CT: VD