IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.52271 OF 2016 (GM-FC) BETWEEN:
MR. B.S. DHARMENDRA S/O LATE B. SADASHIVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.110, BYALAKERE VILLAGE, MAGADI TALUK, RAMAMGARA DISTRICT, BENGALURU-560023.
(By Mr. RAJAGOPAL NAIDU, ADV., (ABSENT)) AND:
MRS. B.S. ARCHANA W/O B.S. DHARMENDRA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.651, 7TH MAIN, NGEF LAYOUT, NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU-72.
… PETITIONER … RESPONDENT (By Smt. A. LALITHA AND Mr. S. VINAYAK, ADVS., C/RESPONDENT (ABSENT)) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DTD.9.3.2016 PASSED ON IA.NO.3 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 24 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT GRANTING INTERIM MAINTENANCE OF RS.8,000/- (RUPEES EIGHT THOSUAND ONLY) TOGETHER WITH LITIGATION EXPENSES BY THE IV ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE, BENGALURU IN M.C.NO.1315/2013 AS PER ANNEX-A AND TO DISMISS THE APPLICATION OF THE RESPONDENT & ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER None for the parties.
2. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 09.03.2016, by which the application filed by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been partly allowed and the petitioner herein has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- to the respondent from the date of application till the disposal of the petition as well as the litigation expenses, which have been quantified at Rs.5,000/-. A bench of this Court had granted an ad interim order dated 29.05.2017 has stayed the operation of the order dated 09.03.2016 on the ground that a petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 the respondent is already being paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- p.m. by way of maintenance. The aforesaid petition is pending before this Court since 2016, in which the ad-interim order has been passed in favour of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, instead of adjudicating the validity of the order dated 09.03.2016, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Family Court to decide the main proceedings itself within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today. Till the proceedings are decided by the Family Court ad interim order granted by this Court dated 29.05.2017 shall continue. Office is directed to transmit a copy of this order by fax to the concerned Family Court.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS