Back
2023 Supreme(Kar) 1341
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ALOK ARADHE, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE, JJ.
Sri. Sunil Shetty - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Namratha and ors. - Respondents
MFA No.3143 of 2016 In RPFC NO.49 of 2015: (FC), In MFA CROB No.90 of 2016,
In MFA No.3143 of 2016
Decided on : 31-05-2023.
For the Petitioner:Sri Nataraja Ballal, Advocate, Sri Suyog Herale E Advocate
For the Respondent:- Sri Suyog Herale E, Advocate, Sri Nataraja Ballal, Advocate.
Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 13(1)(i-a), (i-b) and 13(2)(iii) - Dissolution of marriage sought on grounds of cruelty and desertion - Permanent alimony of Rs.20 lakhs awarded to wife after modifying initial amount of Rs.15 lakhs - Husband's claims of financial incapacity rejected based on evidence of property ownership and income sources, despite prior failure to disclose complete financial details. (Paras 5, 29, 34)
(B) Maintenance - An earlier order for monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- for the wife and Rs.2,500/- each for children upheld; the husband’s failure to comply with maintenance obligations noted. (Paras 30, 34)
Facts of the case:
Marriage solemnized on 09.09.2002; allegations of abandonment and cruelty; two daughters involved; previous marital disputes leading to dissolution petition.
Findings of Court:
Evidence substantiated that the husband had the financial means to provide alimony and maintain his family; acknowledged prior maintenance order's relevance.
Issues: Whether the wife is entitled to enhanced alimony; validity of maintenance awarded to wife and children.
Ratio Decidendi: The court prioritized evidence of financial capacity over the husband’s claims of financial instability; alimony adjusted based on comprehensive analysis of assets and responsibilities.
Result: Appeal rejected; alimony increased to Rs.20 lakhs with conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for dissolution of marriage and alimony. (Para 4 , 5 , 9) |
| 2. husband's denial of allegations and claims. (Para 11 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. consideration of parties' evidence and claims. (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 17) |
| 4. assessment of husband's financial status and alimony. (Para 20 , 23 , 28) |
| 5. modification and final orders on alimony and maintenance. (Para 31 , 32 , 34) |
JUDGMENT :
Anant Ramanath Hegde, J. - MFA No.3143/2016 and MFA Crob. No.90/2016 arise from the judgment and decree dated 15.03.2016 in M.C. No.28/2015 on the file of Family Court, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore.
2. RPFC No.49/2015 arises from the judgment in dated 02.12.2004 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.2/2014 on the file of Family Court, Mangalore.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the proceedings are referred to as husband and wife.
4. The wife filed M.C.No.28/2015 seeking dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(i-a), (i-b) & 13(2)(iii) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act'). The husband in the said petition filed a counterclaim under Section 9 of the Act and sought for restitution of conjugal rights.
5. In terms of the impugned judgment and decree, the Family Court allowed the petition under Section 13(1) (i-a), (i-b) of the Act, and rejected the claim under Section 13(2)(iii) of the Act. The counterclaim filed by the husband is also rejected. The Family Court awarded Rs.15 lakhs as permanent alimony to the wife.
6. The husband is in appeal in MFA No.3143/2016 challenging the judgment and decree granting divorce and permanent alimony of Rs.15 lakhs.
7. The cross objection is filed by the wife challenging the part of the judgment refusing the claim of Rs.30 lakhs towards permanent alimony, on the premise that the award of Rs.15 lakhs is on the lower side and she seeks additional alimony of Rs.15 lakhs.
8. The RPFC No.49/2015 referred above, is filed by the husband challenging the judgment passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.2/2014 on the file of Family Court, Mangalore. In terms of the order dated 02.12.2014 in a petition filed by the wife and her two daughters, under Section 125 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , the Court awarded Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife as maintenance and Rs.2,500/- per month to her two daughters.
9. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the case can be summarized as under:
The marriage of the parties was solemnized on 09.09.2002. From the marriage, two daughters were born. The elder daughter was born on 08.06.2004 and the younger daughter was born on 28.02.2008. For few days after the marriage, the parties stayed in Mangaluru and later they shifted to Bangaluru. The husband started a hotel business in Bengaluru. Wife claims that she assisted her husband in running the hotel. Children were born when the husband and wife were in Bengaluru. The wife contends that the husband for no reason suspected her chastity, started ill-treating her, used to insult and abuse her. Wife alleges that she and her two children were forced out from his home in Bengaluru. Since then she is residing with her aged parents. It is further alleged that in the month of September 2012, the husband visited her parent's house and she was forced to sign a petition which she later realized that it is a joint petition seeking the dissolution of the marriage. It is stated that her signatures were under the threat of kidnapping the children. The said petition was later dismissed for want of her consent.
10. It is further alleged that, as the husband refused to maintain the wife and children, she filed a petition seeking maintenance for herself and on behalf of the children in Criminal Misc. No.2/2014. The trial Court vide order dated 02.12.2014 directed the husband to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and Rs.2,500/- per month each to the minor daughters and it is stated that the order is not complied with. It is her contention that her husband treated her with cruelty. He deserted her and her children and refused to m
