- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
SRI YOGESH K C v. SMT SONY H
- 1 -
NC: 2023:KHC:27169
WP No. 16208 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 16208 OF 2023 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. YOGESH K C,
S/O C R NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/O KELAGINASASI VILLAGE AND POST,
SIDDAPUR TALUK,
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581 355. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GANAPATHI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. SONY H,
D/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/O SHIVAJI ROAD,
SAGAR TOWN, SAGAR,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 401. …RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER THE DTD 30.03.2023 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC AT SAGAR ON IANO. IV IN MC NO. 29/2020 UNDER ANNX-G BY ISSUING THE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
CERTIORARI CONSEQUENTLY AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- 2 -
ORDER
Petitioner is the husband and Respondent is the wife; they are an estranged couple. Petitioner has filed M.C.No.29/2021 seeking a decree for dissolution of their marriage on certain grounds. Respondent-wife's Application in I.A.No.IV filed u/s.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 having been favoured, learned I Addl. Prl. Judge of Family Court at Bengaluru vide order dated 30.03.2023 has directed the Petitioner-husband to pay Rs.15,000/- per month for the maintenance of child. The same is put in challenge in writ jurisdiction.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and having perused the Petition papers, this court declines indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, the marital relationship with the Respondent is not disputed and the legitimacy of the child is also admitted. The submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that his client does not have sufficient means to pay maintenance is difficult to countenance. It is a duty in law, in religion and in reason that the father has to make
- 3 -
payment for the maintenance of children. Though Respondent - wife is working, even otherwise the principal duty is on the shoulders of father to take care of his children.
3. That apart, the impugned order dated 30.03.2023 is a product of exercise of statutory discretion; for invoking writ remedy under Article 226/227 a strong case for violation of rules of reason & justice has to be made out. In the instant case, there is not even a whisper substantiating the said contention. Therefore, all aspects having been duly considered, this Court opines that the impugned order does not merit a deeper examination in constitutionally vested under Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction under vide SADAHANA LODH vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. Ltd., (2003) 3 SCC 524.
4. The above apart, the objective of granting interim maintenance is to ensure that the dependent spouse/child is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the failure of the marriage, and not as a
- 4 -
punishment to the other spouse. There is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance to be awarded. Vide RANJESH v. NEHA, (2021) 2 SCC 324. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition being devoid of merits is liable to be rejected and accordingly it is, costs having been made easy.
The Registry shall send a copy of this judgment to the Respondent-wife through Speed Post immediately.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Bsv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52
Alert