Karnataka High Court
Sunitha @ Rekha vs D Karibasavana Gowda on 3 November, 2016
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A S Bopanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION Nos.4749-4751/2016 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SUNITHA @ REKHA
W/O SRI D KARIBASAVANA GOUDA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT SRI KOTTARESHAPPA NILAYA
ANJANEYA EXTENSION
KOTTURU, KUDLIGI TALUK,
BELLARY DISTRICT-583134.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. M T JAGAN MOHAN, ADV.)
AND:
SRI. D KARIBASAVANA GOUDA
S/O D MAHARUDRA GOUDA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT UCHANGIDURGA
HARAPANAHALLI TALUK
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-583125
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VINAYAKA S KOTI, ADV. FOR
SRI. S.S. KOTI, ADV.)
THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
& 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER
TO QUASH THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HARAPANAHALLI
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.10.2014 ON I.A.NO.I AND MODIFY
THE I.A.2 VIDE ANNX-F IN M.C.13/2013 AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMANARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
2
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 18.10.2014 on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 in M.C.No.13/2013. The petitioner is also seeking that on setting aside the order, appropriate maintenance and litigation expenses be granted to the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. Due to marital discord, they have been residing separately and the child born out of the wedlock who is aged about six years is with the petitioner herein. The respondent has initiated a petition in M.C.No.13/2013 seeking a decree of divorce. In the pending proceedings, the petitioner herein has filed applications in I.A.Nos.1 and 2 seeking payment of litigation expenses as also interim maintenance for herself and the child. The Court below through the order dated 18.10.2014 has dismissed I.A.No.1 whereby the petitioner had sought for litigation 3 expenses while in respect of I.A.No.2 seeking maintenance as against the amount sought in the application, the Court below has ordered Rs.5,000/- to the respondent and Rs.2,000/- to the child. The petitioner therefore claiming to be aggrieved by the same, is before this Court seeking enhancement.
3. Insofar as the order relating to maintenance, the respondent herein had also filed a petition in W.P.No.54077/2014 seeking reduction of the maintenance awarded. This Court on hearing the learned counsel for the parties through the order dated 06.04.2016 has affirmed the order of the Court below and maintained the amount which had been ordered as maintenance for the petitioner herein as well as the child. Though in the said circumstance this Court was of the opinion that the amount cannot be held as excessive and an appropriate consideration could still be made, at this point, taking note of the consideration made by the 4 Court below with regard to the grant of maintenance any other opinion cannot be arrived at, at this juncture. Further due to the changed circumstance, if the petitioner herein is to seek for additional maintenance, such liberty is however left open to the petitioner to file appropriate application before the Court below and if such application is filed, the Court below shall consider the same without treating the order dated 18.10.2014 and the confirmation of the same by this Court in W.P.No.54077/2014 and this petition as a bar for consideration of such application. In that view, I find no reason to interfere with the order passed on I.A.No.2.
4. Insofar as I.A.No.1 the petitioner had sought for litigation expenses. The Court below though has rejected the application has not assigned any reasons. When the application for maintenance is accepted on the ground that the petitioner herein does not have her own income to maintain herself, certainly some provision is also 5 required to be made to effectively defend the litigation by providing litigation expenses to the petitioner herein.
5. To the said extent, the order dated 18.10.2014 on I.A.No.1 is modified holding that the petitioner is entitled to the litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- which shall be paid by the respondent to the petitioner before the Court below on the next date of hearing.
With the said modification, these petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE akc/bms