SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Kar) 233

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
VINEET KOTHARI, H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY, JJ.
SHRI.AMIT S/O VINAY WELANGI – Appellant
Vs.
MRS.NUPUR W/O AMIT WELANGI – Respondent
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.100178 of 2015 (FC)
Decided on : 01-06-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI. A. B. NESARGI, ADVOCATE
For the Respondent:SRI. M G NAGANURI, ADVOCATE

Headnote:HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 [C.A. NO. 25/1955] - Section 25 - Permanent alimony - Wife not making any application for grant of permanent alimony - While granting decree of divorce in favour of husband, permanent alimony can be granted in favour of wife - On date of filing divorce petition, husband working as Software Engineer at Pune and earning Rs. 46,000/- per month - Wife working as part time lecturer in law college stated to be drawing Rs. 16,000/- per month - Considering place of living of wife and requirement of decent living suitable to status of parties, sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- awarded as permanent alimony.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petition filed by the present appellant in the Court of Judge, Family Court Belagavi, at Belagavi (henceforth referred to as ‘Family Court’ for brevity), against the present respondent under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (henceforth referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity), seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent came to be dismissed by the judgment of the Family Court dated 01.12.2014. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

2. The summary of the case of the appellant in the Family Court was that;

His marriage was solemnized with the respondent on 05.12.2003 at Belagavi as per the customs prevailing in their community. Both of them led marital life for a period of six years happily and out of their wedlock, they also got a son born to them. He took care of his wife in a better manner and also helped her in pursuing her post graduation course in law. Gradually his wife started visiting her parental house often and in one such situation, on 31.03.2009, all of a sudden the respondent-wife along with her child left to her parental home stating that she would spend vacation there, but did not return to her marital house thereafter. On the contrary, she filed a petition against him seeking maintenance in the Family Court in Crl.Misc.No.488/2009, which came to be partly allowed directing the appellant herein to pay monthly maintenance to their son. The wife also filed a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class – III at Belagavi under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the D.V. Act’ for brevity) in Crl.Misc.No.197/2009 by making several false allegations against him. Several attempts made by him as well the elders and well wishers in the family to bring her back to her marital home went in vain. This made him to institute a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Act against her, which incidentally came to be dismissed. In this way, the cruelty and harassment meted to him by the respondent-wife did not stop. She further filed a suit for partition through her minor son in the Court of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Belagavi in O.S.No.175/2009. However, the said suit came to be dismissed on 19.04.2012. Regarding a theft taken place in their house in the month of October-November, 2008, the wife also filed a police complaint in Kothrud police station, Pune on 16.11.2007, wherein the police filed a ‘B’ report in the matter. Further, alleging that neither his wife is willing to join him in her matrimonial home nor allowing him to meet their child, the petitioner in the Family Court has stated that the same constrained him to file a petition seeking dissolution of their marriage.

Upon service of notice, the respondent–wife put her appearance through their counsel. The matter was referred to the conciliation, which ended in vain. She filed her statement of objection, wherein except admitting her marital relationship with the petitioner/husband and they begetting a child out of their marriage wedlock, she denied all other petition averments, more particularly the allegation that for no valid reasons she has deserted her husband and has practiced cruelty upon him. On the contrary, she accused of her husband addicting to consumption of alcohol and quarreling with her on various silly matters. She also accused him of abusing her in front of their child and spoiling the family atmosphere. Contrary to the petition averment, the respondent–wife alleged that she was harassed and subjected to mental torture by the petitioner-husband. She also alleged that, apart from her husband being a chronic consumer of alcohol, he has also been in the company of another woman by name Miss. Nirmala Baban Chinchawade, resident of Pune and that he is spending huge amount on the said lady in order to keep her pleased. She stated that, both of them are leading life in broad day light
































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top