IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.1990/2018(GM-FC) BETWEEN SMT. ARUNA L AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O H.N. SHIVAKUMAR, R/AT NO.99, 3RD CROSS, BHAUVANESHWARI NAGAR, BSK 3RD STAGE, KATTARIGUPPE, BENGALURU-560854.
(BY SRI C. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND SRI H N SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS S/O. LATE NANJUNDAIAH, R/AT NO.35/102, 3RD CROSS, PUKHARAJ LAYOUT, LAKKASANDRA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560030.
... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT (BY SMT. G.M. SUMITHRA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 03.11.2017 ON THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 24 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT IN M.C.NO.1407/2016 ON THE FILE OF COURT OF THE 5TH ADDL PRINCIPAL JUDGE VIDE ANNX-H.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has been aggrieved by the order dated 03.11.2017 passed by the Family Court, Bengaluru, by which, the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been rejected.
3. The facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition briefly stated are that the parties got married on 10.06.1982. They have two sons. The petitioner has filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking dissolution of the marriage with the respondent. Along with the petition, the petitioner filed an application under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act seeking maintenance from the respondent. The respondent resisted the aforesaid application on the ground that he has no source of income and he is unable to maintain even himself. Thereupon the Family Court by impugned order has rejected the application filed by the petitioner.
4. When the matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner while inviting attention of this Court to order dated 21.07.2007 passed under provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, submitted that the respondent is receiving a sum of Rs.9,500/- under the provisions of the aforesaid Act.
5. In such situation of the case and taking into account the fact that the respondent is receiving a sum of Rs.9,500/- per month, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month to the petitioner by way of maintenance as it is admitted that the petitioner is wife of the respondent and the respondent is under a statutory obligation to maintain his wife. At this stage the trial Court is invited to the provisions of the Karnataka (Case Flow Management in Sub-Ordinate Courts Rules), 2005, which provides that matrimonial dispute should be adjudicated as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.
The Family Court has to make endeavor the dispute between the parties within a period of six months from today. With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of.
SBS* Sd/- JUDGE