1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 31^st DAY OF JANUARY 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

W.P.No.32479 OF 2013(GM-FC)

AND

W.P.Nos.32480-32481 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

Mrs. Anitha Sarah Joseph

Wife of Mr. Joseph George

Aged about 39 years

Residing at No.158

Sector ‘B’ Jalvayu Vihar

Kammanahalli

Bangalore-560 084.

… Petitioner

(By Sri. Christropher.E, Advocate)

AND:

Mr. Joseph George

Son of Mr. K.M. George

Aged about 43 years

Residing at Navi Mumbai

Working as Investment Banking Executive

In Barclays Bank, PLC

No.801/808, Ceejay House

Shivsagar Estate

Dr. Annie Besant Road

Worli, Mumbai-400018. ... Respondent

(By Smt. S.K. Prathima, Advocate)

2

These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227

of the Constitution of India praying to call for records in

Crl.Misc.No.427/2008 pending on the file of the I Addl.

Family Judge, Bangalore, and after examining the legality

and the validity of the orders dted:11.07.2013, 17.7.2013

& 9.07.2013 set aside the orders vide Annexures G, K and

M & etc.

These writ petitions, coming on for preliminary

hearing ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court, made the following:

ORDER

These writ petitions are directed against the orders

dated

11.07.2013,

17.07.2013

and

19.07.2013

vide

Annexures G, K and M passed by the I Additional Family

Court, Bangalore in C.Misc.No.427/2008.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was

married to the respondent on 17.12.2001 at Pune as per

the Christian Canon Law and subsequent to the said

marriage, petitioner-wife resided with the respondent-

husband making the same their matrimonial home. From

the wedlock, petitioner and respondent were blessed with

two sons namely Master Timothy and Master Titus.

3

Subsequently, they were not living together. Hence, the

petitioner has filed C.Misc.No.427/2008 for maintenance.

In the said proceedings an interim application was filed

seeking for interim maintenance. The Family Court vide

order dated 29.05.2009 directed the respondent to pay

each of the minor children Rs.4,000/- per month. Being

aggrieved by the quantum of maintenance awarded, the

petitioner

has

filed

W.P.No.26541/2009

seeking

for

enhancement of the maintenance. This Court, by order

dated 13.09.2010 disposed of the writ petition enhancing

the maintenance from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.6,000/-.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the

petitioner has filed an application I.A.No.8 under Order 16

Rule 6 of CPC for production of documents, I.A.No.10 under

Section 151 of CPC for recalling the witness and I.A.No.11

filed under Section 151 of CPC for further cross-

examination. After hearing the parties the Family Court has

4

rejected the applications filed by the petitioner. Being

aggrieved by the same, she has filed these writ petitions.

4. Sri Joshua Hudson Samuel, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that during the cross-examination the

respondent has stated that “I do not wish to share Form

No.16A issued by the Bank to me. I have Housing Loan and

personal loan. I am paying Rs.40000 per month towards

Housing Loan. Approximately towards Rs.10,000/- personal

loan. It is true that the Bank in which I am working gives

housing loan. It is true that I have taken housing loan from

my Bank and so also personal loan. The witness voluntaries

that he has also taken other personal loan. It is true that

the additional personal loan and personal loan both of them

by taken after filing of this petition. I have taken both

these loans to meet family expenses litigation expenses and

to re pay the earlier personal loans taken by me.” In view

of this statement, it is necessary to file an application for

5

production of the above said documents and the salary

certificate to determine the income of the respo