-1-

MFA No.5732 of 2015

C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
M.F.A. NO.5732 OF 2015 (FC)
C/W
R.P.F.C. NO.125 OF 2015

IN M.F.A. NO.5732 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. SHUBHA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
HOUSEWIFE
R/O NIJALINGAPPA LAYOUT
DAVANAGERE-577001.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. KEMPANNA, ADV.,)
AND:

1. SRI. H. SATISH
S/O H.N. ONKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
OCC:BUSINESS
R/AT # 820, OPP: S.E. OFFICE
R.M.R. ROAD, PARK EXTENSION
SHIVAMOGGA.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. ABHINAY Y.T. ADV.,)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURT

ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE

DATED:19.06.2015 PASSED IN CRI.MISC. NO.326/2013 ON THE

 -2-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

FILE OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT DAVANGERE,

DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/S 125 OF CR.P.C.

IN R.P.F.C. NO.125 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. SHUBHA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
HOUSE WIFE
R/O NIJALINGAPPA LAYOUT
DAVANGERE.

…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. KEMPANNA, ADV.,)
AND:

1. SRI. H. SATISH
S/O H.N. ONKARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/AT NO.820, OPP: S.E. OFFICE
RMR ROAD, PARK EXTENSION
SHIVAMOGA.

…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. ABHINAY Y.T. ADV.,)

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF FAMILY COURT

ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED

19.06.2015 PASSED IN CRI.MISC.NO.326/2013 ON THE FILE

OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE, DISMISSING

THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C.

 -3-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

THIS APPEAL AND THIS RPFC COMING ON FOR FINAL

HEARING, THIS DAY ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

COMMON JUDGMENT

This appeal and revision petition have been filed by

the wife which arise out of common judgment dated

19.06.2015 passed in M.C.No.80/2014 and

Crl.Misc.No.326/2013. By the aforesaid common

judgment, the Family Court has allowed the petition

filed by the husband under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')

and has dismissed the petition filed by the wife under

Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. The appeal and revision

petition were therefore heard together and are being

decided by this common judgment.

2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal and

revision petition, briefly stated are that the marriage

between the parties was performed on 21.05.1987 in

 -4-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

Basaveshwara Kalyana Mantapa, Hassan. Out of the

wedlock, a son and a daughter namely Sharath and

Niharika were born to them. It is not in dispute that the

son namely Sharath has completed his graduation in

Engineering and is assisting the husband in her

business. Similarly, daughter namely Niharika has also

completed her graduation in Engineering and is under

the care and custody of the husband. The husband

filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act on 02.04.2014

seeking restitution of conjugal rights. It was inter alia

pleaded in the petition that the husband on 30.09.2012

at about 3 a.m., picked up a quarrel with the wife on the

ground of alleged illicit relationship. The wife, however,

refuted the allegations made by the husband. However,

the wife left the matrimonial home and started residing

with her sister. However, despite efforts being made by

the husband, the wife did not join the matrimonial

home. The husband thereupon filed a petition seeking

restitution of conjugal rights.

 -5-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

3. The wife, on being served with the notice of the

proceedings, filed statement of objections in which the

relationship between the parties as well as the factum of

birth of children was admitted. However, remaining

averments made in the petition were denied. It was

averred that the husband, after the death of his mother,

used to suspect the chastity of the wife and prevented

her from giving public performances as veena player. It

was also pleaded that the husband pressurized the wife

to accept that she was having illicit relationship with

other persons. However, when the wife refused to

accept the same, she was ill-treated and harassed by

the husband. Thereupon, she left the matrimonial

home. It was also pleaded that since the wife had filed a

petition seeking maintenance, therefore, as a counter

blast, this petition under Section 9 of the Act was filed.

The husband examined himself as PW-1 and exhibited

 -6-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P3. The wife examined

herself and did not produce any document.

4. The Family Court, vide judgment dated

19.06.2015 inter alia held that the wife has abandoned

the matrimonial home on her own will and wish without

there being any justifiable ground. Accordingly, the

petition filed by the husband under Section 9 of the Act

was allowed. The Family Court, vide common judgment

passed in Crl.Misc.No.326/2013 inter alia held that the

wife has failed to prove that the husband has willfully

refused and has neglected to maintain the wife. It has

further held that the wife has left the matrimonial home

on her won will and wish and therefore, she is not

entitled to claim maintenance. Accordingly, the Family

Court vide judgment dated 19.06.2015, allowed

M.C.No.80/2014 filed by the husband whereas

dismissed Crl.Misc.No.326/2013 filed by the wife. In

 -7-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

the aforesaid factual background, this appeal and

revision petition have been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the wife submitted that the

husband is not taking care of the children and the wife.

It is further submitted that the Family Court has not

considered the facts. Learned counsel for the wife has

read paragraph 17 as well as paragraphs 24 and 25 of

the judgment. It is also pointed out that the wife is

looking after the children. On the other hand, learned

counsel for the husband has supported the judgment

and decree passed by the Family Court.

6. We have considered the submissions made on

both sides and have perused the record. From perusal

of the statement of husband as well as wife, it is evident

that the marriage between the parties was performed on

21.05.1987. Thereafter, they have stayed together for a

period of 25 years. All of a sudden, on 30.09.2012, the

 -8-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

wife left the matrimonial home. Thereafter, no effort has

been made by her to join the matrimonial home. The

husband is interested in continuing the marital life with

the wife and therefore, filed a petition under Section 9 of

the Act. The Family Court, in the state of evidence on

record, has rightly allowed the petition filed by the

husband. Sofar as the claim of the wife with regard to

payment of maintenance at Rs.35,000/- p.m. is

concerned, from the evidence adduced by the parties, it

is evident that the wife has failed to prove that the

husband has either willfully refused or neglected to

maintain her. The wife herself has abandoned the

matrimonial home on 30.09.2012 and since then, for

more than 10 years, she is residing separately.

Therefore, the ingredients as mentioned under Section

125 of Cr.P.C. not having been satisfied, the Family

 -9-
MFA No.5732 of 2015
C/W RPFC No.125 of 2015

Court has rightly rejected the claim preferred by the

wife.

For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find

any merit in the appeal as well as petition.

Accordingly, the same fail and are hereby

dismissed.

Consequently, the pending interlocutory

applications, if any, are also dismissed.

Sd/-
JUDGE

Sd/-
JUDGE

RV