JUDGMENT :

S.N. SATYANARAYANA, J.

The defendant in O.S.No.12/2014 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gadag, has come up in this appeal, impugning the judgment and decree dated 09.11.2016 passed therein.

2. Admittedly, the said suit in O.S.No.12/2014 was filed under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, along with invoking the provisions of Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. The prayer of the plaintiff who is respondent herein is that her father/defendant in the said suit be directed to pay maintenance and expenses to the plaintiff; that he should go on paying the maintenance till the marriage of the plaintiff and further he should be directed to meet the marriage expenses of the plaintiff, in the event the marriage of the plaintiff is fixed and make arrangement for smooth education career of the plaintiff. In the said suit, the only defendant is the appellant herein who is none other than the father of plaintiff wherein he filed his written statement denying all the allegations except the relationship between himself and the plaintiff and also that the plaintiff has completed engineering in Electronics and Communication in the year 2013 itself and secured admission for PG Course in Shridevi Institute of Engineering and Technology, Tumkur, and he would state that she has already completed first and second semester by the time he would file the written statement. However, other allegations are denied by him. He would further state that he has already paid a sum of Rs.1,65,000/-to the plaintiff for her education expenses and would deny the plaint averments regarding Rs.1,58,160/- is already utilized out of Rs.1,65,000/-paid by him and so also her demand for purchase of latest laptop and other gadgets for educational purpose. He would also deny the need of plaintiff to a sum of Rs.15,000/-p.m. which she has calculated at Rs.1,80,000/-per year. In the said written statement, he would also state that she is already earning a sum of Rs.45,000/-to Rs.50,000/-per month which she has suppressed from the Court. With this pleadings, the Court below framed the following issues:

(i) Whether plaintiff proves that she is legitimate daughter of defendant?

(ii) Whether the plaintiff further proves that she is unable to maintain herself?

(iii) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of maintenance as sought for?

(iv) What order or decree?

4. Thereafter, the matter went into trial where the plaintiff adduced evidence as PW-1 which is nothing but reiteration of plaint averments. In the cross-examination, she would state that besides herself, her parents have other children; namely Keerthinath, Pooja, Sukanya and Mahantesh. According to the plaintiff, Sukanya is already married and Pooja has studied upto II PUC and thereafter she has given up her education and she is due for marriage. However, in the entire evidence, the plaintiff has not stated whether her marriage is finalized or otherwise and what is the quantum of money that is required for her marriage expenses. So far as the defendant in the said suit who is the appellant herein is concerned, he has not entered into the witness box and adduced evidence, except subjecting the plaintiff for cross-examination. Issue No.1 which is with reference to whether plaintiff is legitimate daughter of defendant, is answered in the affirmative; issue No.2 as to whether the plaintiff is unable to maintain herself, is answered in the affirmative and issue No.3 with reference to the prayer whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of maintenance as sought for, is answered partly in the affirmative. While passing the final order, the Court below would decree the suit partly in granting maintenance to the plaintiff to the tune of Rs.10,000/- p.m. till her marriage and to pay marriage expenses of Rs.15 lakhs to the plaintiff. It is this order of the Court below which is under challenge in this proceedings, on the ground that the suit was disposed of in haste,