LAWS(KAR)-2015-6-413

SHIVANAND Vs. JAYAMALA

Decided On June 18, 2015
SHIVANAND Appellant
V/S
Jayamala Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The husband filed RPFC No. 100083/2014 for reduction of maintenance and the wife filed RPFC No. 100083/2015 for enhancement, against the impugned order passed by the Family Court dated 29.05.2014, made in Criminal Misc. Case No. 11/2013, on the file of the Family Court, Gadag, granting maintenance of Rs. 4,000/ - per month to the wife.

(2.) Parties will be referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court, for convenience.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner and respondent were married on 21.04.2000 at Bagalkot and after the marriage, the petitioner went along with the respondent to lead marital life at Kerur village. The petitioner was very much cooperative with her in -laws and also the respondent. Inspite of that, the respondent at the instigation of his relatives started harassing the petitioner for simple reasons. The petitioner has tolerated all the ill -treatment. The petitioner became pregnant. Inspite of that, the respondent has not stopped his ill -treatment and he has subjected the petitioner to utmost physical and mental cruelty. During that period, the petitioner gave birth to a female child and the child died after four hours. It is the further case of the petitioner that the respondent, his parents, his brothers and sisters used to harass the petitioner frequently and they have also thrown her out of the house without allowing her to lead marital life with the respondent. The respondent has also given life threat to the petitioner and he has also informed the petitioner that he will take away her life if she comes to his house. The respondent and his family members have completely neglected the petitioner and also contended that she came to know that the respondent has contracted second marriage with one Shobha and he has got two daughters by name Kallavva and Parvati. The respondent has also subjected the petitioner to utmost cruelty by taking second wife. She further contended that the respondent has a wholesale grocery merchant and he owns 3 -4 houses and he is receiving monthly rents and he is earning more than Rs. 50,000/ - from all the sources and he has capacity to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000/ - to the petitioner, etc. Therefore, she filed the petition.