Karnataka High Court
Naveen S/O Late Mahadevappa Angadi vs Vidya W/O Naveen on 21 January, 2015
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N.Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF JANUARY 2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA
R.P.F.C No.620/2013
Between:
Sri. Naveen
S/o Late Mahadevappa Angadi
Aged: About 33 years
Residing at No.4/1 8th main
8th cross, tata silk form,
Tyagarajanagar
Bangalore 560 028.
... Petitioner
(By Sri. Nagabhusana & Sri.Amresh Roja Advocates)
And:
Smt.Vidya W/o Sri.Naveen,
D/o Sangappa Jolad,
Aged about 23 years,
R/at C/o Santhosh Kumar
Kumbar Galli, Jorapurpet
Bijapur.
... Respondent
This R.P.F.C., is filed U/Sec. 19(4) of the Family Court
Act, against the Judgement and order dated: 04-04-2013
passed in Criminal Misc. No.410/2012 pending on the file of
the Judge, Family Court at Vijapur, wherein, the petition
was allowed with costs of Rs.1,000/- payable by the
respondent - Mr. Naveen Angadi to his petitioner -wife Smt.
Vidya
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court
made the following:
2
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent.
2. The documents disclose that respondent herein Smt.Vidya has filed Criminal Misc. No.410/2012 on the file of Family Court, Vijapur against the petitioner herein (respondent) U/Sec.125 of Cr.P.C. and even after appearance before the trial Court the respondent did not seriously contest the matter, he was only set exparte. Inspite of due service, he did not appear before the Court, that goes without saying the proceeding ended in exparte and ultimately the Court has ordered an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month as maintenance to the petitioner Smt.Vidya.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner before this Court strenuously contend that for various reasons, he did not appear before the trial Court and the said absence may kindly be condoned and he may be permitted to contest the proceedings. However as could be seen from the records, while passing the orders the trial Court has in detail considered the evidence of the wife and 3 also the documents produced therein and the capacity of the respondent and then ordered for maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of the respondent for the time being.
4. However it is just and necessary to set aside the order passed by the trial Court in order to provide an opportunity to the respondent to contest the proceedings by means of filing objections, cross-examining the witnesses on the side of the petitioner and to lead evidence on his side. However what-ever the amount already awarded by the trial Court shall be treated as interim maintenance granted by the Trial Court from the date of petition and the entire arrears has to be paid by the petitioner herein in favour of the respondent and thereafter he is entitled to contest the proceedings and during the pendency of the petition also he shall continue to pay Rs.10,000/- as interim maintenance till the disposal of the petition.
5. Without being persuaded by the observations made by this Court, the trial Court has to consider the case of the petitioner and respondent afresh on the materials that may 4 be produced by the parties before the Court, ultimately the Court has to pass appropriate orders with regard to the grant of quantum of maintenance and adjustment if any regarding the amount already paid. With these observations the petition is allowed.
The order passed by the trial Court is set aside and Rs.10,000/- granted by the trial Court is treated as interim maintenance and shall be payable through out pending disposal of the petition, before the trial Court. The petitioner is also granted one month time to pay the entire arrears of maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- from the date of petition and thereafter he can contest the proceedings before the trial Court.
If any amount is already deposited before this Court, is ordered to be transmitted to the trial Court forth-with and the wife-petitioner therein is permitted to withdraw the said amount.
Sd/-
JUDGE MWS