IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 :BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRL.RP. NO.915/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. S. P. SHIVAKUMAR, S/O PUTTASWAMASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT SIRAGUNDHA VILLAGE, MUGTHIHALLI POST, CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK & DIST. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. P. BHUVAN, ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. R. POOJA @ RADHIKA, W/O S.P.SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O.7561, NEAR ARALIKATE CIRCLE, NORTHERN EXTENSION, HASSAN – 577 101.
2. PUTTASWAMASHETTY, S/O SGANASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 3. SMT. DAKSHAYINI, W/O.PUTTASWAMASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.2 & 3 ARE R/O SIRAGUNDHA VILLAGE, MUGTHIHALLI POST, CHIKKAMAGALUR – 577 201.
4. SMT. ASHA, W/O.TUKRAM, D/O PUTTASWAMASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O.MUDIGERE, CHIKKAMAGALUR DIST – 577 201 ... RESPONDENTS (BY R-1 & R-2 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED. NOTICE TO R-3 & R-4 ARE D/W V.O.DTD.
26.10.2017) THIS CRL.RP. IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 17.11.2015 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., HASSAN IN CRL.MISC.NO.1136/2015 AND THEREBY ALLOW THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.08.2017 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN CRL.A.NO.81/2016.
THIS CRL.RP. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, A/W IA 1/2017 THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 though served, remained absent. Notice to be issued to Respondent Nos. 3 & 4 were already dispensed with. Perused the records.
2. The trial Court has awarded maintenance of Rs.5,000/- in favour of Respondent No.1 against the petitioner herein on the ground that the petitioner drawing a sum of Rs.10,000/- p.m. as salary. The said order was called in question before the Appellate Court viz., III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan in Crl.A. No.81/2006 sofar as quantum of maintenance is concerned. The appellate court has reduced it to Rs.4,000/- p.m. as against Rs.5,000/- p.m., ordered by the trial Court.
3. On careful perusal of the order passed in the criminal appeal it is noticed that, there is an observation by the learned Sessions Judge that the appellant has produced the salary certificate issued by his employer, which would depict that he is drawing a salary of Rs.7,590/- p.m., during November 2016, but the said salary does not contain any other perks, which are going to be paid to Respondent No.1, it is observed that, the trial Court has not properly appreciated the same and wrongly awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- p.m. The Sessions Court also observed that the maintenance amount normally should be 1/3rd of the salary and considering the same it awarded a sum of Rs.4,000/- p.m.. However, even considering that the salary is Rs.7,590/- p.m., and even some perks are given, the amount of Rs.4,000/- exceeds 1/3rd of the amount as ordered by the Appellate Court.
4. In the above circumstances, it would meet the interest of justice, if Rs.3,000/- p.m. is ordered to be payable as interim maintenance, pending disposal of the proceedings before the trial Court. However, if any amount has already been paid to the petitioner, the same has already been to be adjusted at the time of final disposal of the case.
With the above observation, I pass the following:-
ORDER The order 03.08.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Crl. A. No.81/2016 is modified and instead of the direction to the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs.4,000/- p.m., it should be read as Rs.3,000/- p.m. payable to the petitioner/wife (respondent No.1 herein) from the date of interim application filed before the trial court, till the disposal of the case in Criminal Misc. No.1136/2015 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
In view of disposal of this case, the application-IA No.1/2017 filed for stay, does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the said application stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGR*