The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party may seek enhancement of maintenance under Section 37(2) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, based on changed circumstances and the other party's ability to pay.

ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question order dated 12-09-2019 passed on I.A.No.VII, by the II Additional Principal Judge Family Court, Bengaluru in M.C.No.1256 of 2012 c/w. M.C.No.824 of 2012.

2. Heard the petitioner who appeared in-person. The respondent though served by all modes, has neither appeared nor represented.

3. The facts that lead the petitioner to this Court, in the subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:

The petitioner gets married to the respondent on 12.11.2010 and got their marriage registered under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 ('the Act' for short). On their relationship turning sore, the parties are before the Family Court. The petitioner-wife has filed M.C.No.824 of 2012, seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the respondenthusband has filed M.C.No.1256 of 2012, seeking annulment of marriage. The issue in the lis does not concern merits of those proceedings. In the pending proceeding, the petitioner initially filed an application seeking maintenance at the hands of the husband. The same comes to be allowed by the Court by grant of maintenance at Rs.10,000/- per month. Challenging the said order, with regard to the quantum of maintenance granted, the respondent - husband preferred a petition before this Court in Writ Petition No.32994 of 2016, which had by then came to be dismissed. After about three years of filing of the application and grant of maintenance, the petitioner comes up with another application in I.A.VII seeking enhancement of maintenance under Section 37 of the Act, on the ground that there has been changed circumstances and cost of living has also increased. The learned Judge declines to accept the application on the ground that the petitioner has not pleaded any changed circumstances, which has forced her to seek enhancement of maintenance or modification of the earlier order and has not produced any documentary evidence to show that she is in need of money in addition to the maintenance already granted to her. Merely because the husband earns well, it is not a right for the wife to claim more maintenance, is the reason rendered by the concerned Court to decline acceptance of the application. The rejection of the application is what drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. The petitioner appearing in-person would vehemently contend that the respondent-husband is an Anesthesiologist and a retired Squadron Leader and, therefore, his earning is above Rs.1.5 lakhs to Rs.2/- lakhs per month; that the maintenance that is awarded in the year 2012 was Rs.10,000/- per month and in view of rise in cost of living and the petitioner having no earnings of her own, as she is still at nascent stage of Law practice, she is seeking enhancement of maintenance.

5. With regard to service of notice upon the husband, this Court has passed several orders in an effort to get the respondent - husband served. When ordinarily he could not be served, paper publication was also taken out in terms of order dated 25-07-2022. Even then, the respondent did not appear and the service of notice on him is held sufficient on 24-08-2022. In view of his absence throughout, the petitioner in-person is heard.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the petitioner and perused the material on record.

7. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent is not in dispute, neither its subsistence as on date. Two years after marriage, the petitioner - wife institutes M.C.No.824 of 2012 seeking restitution of conjugal rights and in the same breath, the respondent -husband institutes M.C.No.1256 of 2012 seeking annulment of marriage. As observed hereinabove, the issue in the lis does not concern merits of matrimonial petitions pending before the concerned Court.

8. The petitioner files an application before the concerned Court seeking maintenance at an earlier point in time, which was allowed by granting at Rs.10,000/- per month in t