IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 3579 OF 2024 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

TEJAS J., S/O D.JAGANNATHA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/.AT 140, 7^TH MAIN, 3^RD STAGE, DOCTORS CORNER, GOKULAM, MYSORE, KARNATAKA – 570 002 …PETITIONER (BY MRS.BHUSHANI KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

RAJANI A., W/O TEJAS J., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT NO. 50, LIC COLONY, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 3^RD STAGE, 4^TH BLOCK, BASAWESHWARANAGAR, Digitally signed BANGALORE -560 079 by MEGHA MOHAN …RESPONDENT Location:

HIGH COURT (BY SMT.DESIREE M PARIS, ADVOCATE FOR OF SRI.VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE)

KARNATAKA THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE COURT OF II ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE, DATED:29.09.2023 ON IA IN CRL. MISC. NO.334/2019 ANNEXURE-E.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL ORDER

Aggrieved by the orders passed in an application under section 125(1a) of Cr.P.C in Crl.Misc.No.334/2019 dated 29.09.2023 by II Additional principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had granted an amount of Rs.15,000/- as maintenance to the wife, the husband is before this Court.

2. Both the parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband submits that the Family Court without considering any of the aspects had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.15,000/-

which is on the higher side.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/wife submits that the petitioner/husband has approached this Court by filing a writ petition in the year 2024. From the year 2024 till now the husband has paid an amount of Rs.2,30,000/-. It is submitted that the husband has not filed his statement of assets and liabilities and in fact he is earning more than a lakh and the wife is entitled for the maintenance as claimed. The amount of maintenance awarded by the Family Court is not reasonable.

5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. While granting the maintenance, the Family Court had observed that the assets and liabilities furnished by the wife shows that she is a homemaker and unemployed. According to the wife, the husband is a mechanical engineer and also a partner in a leading company and she is not aware of the income of the husband. The husband has failed to file his statement of assets and liabilities. The conduct of the husband is sufficient to draw adverse inference and granted an amount of Rs.15,000/- as maintenance. The Family Court had rightly granted the maintenance, this Court is of the view that no interference is called for with the order impugned. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rajneesh Vs. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324 the parties are supposed to file their statement of assets and liabilities, for the best reasons known to the husband, neither he has filed before the Family Court nor before this Court and the Family Court had rightly taken an adverse interference and granted an amount of Rs.15,000/- and this Court finds no reason to interfere.

6. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following:

ORDER

i. The order impugned requires no interference from this court.

ii. After deducting an amount of Rs.2,30,000/- that is paid by the petitioner/husband, the remaining arrears shall be paid within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

iv. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed.

Sd/-

(LALITHA KANNEGANTI)

JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14