BANGALORE SOUTH v. (BY SRI. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 01 Jan 2011
- Bench
- H G RAMESH
Outcome
Disposed of
The revision petition stands disposed of in the
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH RPFC No.22/2011 BETWEEN: 1 SMT. G L SUJATHA W/O SRI. K.B.DHARMARAJ AGED 36 YEARS 2 KUM. D.AISHWARYA D/O SRI. K.B.DHARMARAJ AGED 16 YEARS 3 KUM. D.AMRUTHA D/O SRI. K.B. DHARMARAJ AGED 13 YEARS 2 & 3 BEING MINORS REPRESENTED BY FIRST PETITIONER – MOTHER ALL ARE R/O KALLABALUR ROAD JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 560 105 … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R RAJA FOR SRI. R.B.SADASIVAPPA, ADVOCATES) AND: SRI. K B DHARMARAJ S/O SRI. K.P. BASAVARAJAPPA, 49 YEARS WORKING AS DAFTRI, KPTCL NYAMTHI, HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 577 217 (BY SRI. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE) … RESPONDENT -2- RPFC.No.22/2011 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.12.2010 PASSED IN C.MIS.No.97/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/S 125 OF CR.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS RPFC COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Operative part
O R D E R H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral): Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the respondent jointly submit that the respondent may be directed to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to each of his daughters namely petitioner nos.2 & 3 from 1st January 2011 till their marriage reserving liberty to the petitioners to apply to the Family Court for enhancement of the maintenance, if circumstances warrant. They submit that the said amount may be directed to be paid to petitioner no.1, who is the mother of petitioner nos.2 & 3. Ordered accordingly. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondent will pay the entire arrears of maintenance -3- RPFC.No.22/2011 payable to petitioner nos.2 & 3 in three instalments within three months from today. His submission is placed on record. The revision petition stands disposed of in the above terms in modification of the order impugned herein. Petition disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE hkh.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The revision petition stands disposed of in the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Karnataka High Court, on 01 Jan 2011. The bench was H G RAMESH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.