Padmavati vs Yallappa

S.N. Satyanarayana, J.—The petitioner in Criminal Misc. No. 287/2007 on the file of Family Court, Belgaum has come up in this petition seeking enhancement of maintenance awarded in the said proceedings which was initiated under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The brief facts leading to this petition are as under:

"Petitioner was the wife and respondent was her husband. The marriage was solemnized about 25 years prior to the date of filing criminal miscellaneous petition. It is seen that Criminal Misc. No. 287/2007 is filed under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking enhancement of maintenance from Rs. 400/- to Rs. 2,000/- per month payable by the respondent - husband. The marriage that had taken place between the petitioner and the respondent is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that in the wedlock they had a daughter by name Basavva. It is seen that relationship of petitioner and respondent is severed under an agreement said to have executed between them on 18.04.1994, in accordance with the customs prevailing in their community, where the parties are entitled to sever the relationship of marriage by mutual consent in the presence of elders of the family. A copy of that is produced this day along with a memo which is not denied by the petitioner - wife. The plain reading of the said document would indicate that as on 1994, the petitioner and respondent who had married and lived together for about ten years, by then have decided to dissolve the relationship of husband and wife between them and in terms of the settlement arrived at between them which is reduced into writing in agreement dated 18.04.1994, under the terms of settlement the child has continued to live with the petitioner - wife and husband has provided permanent maintenance of Rs. 6,000/-, wherein it was clearly agreed between the parties that subsequent to the said agreement, the husband has no liability to pay any maintenance to her and each one of them are free to go in their own way to decide about their future life. In this background, it is seen that the petitioner and the respondent have parted way in the year 1994 and thereafter, they have not lived together as husband and wife."

It is seen that immediately after the settlement is arrived at, the wife going back on her assurance that the amount of Rs. 6,000/- received by her is permanent alimony has filed petition under Section 125 in Criminal Misc. No. 145/1994 seeking maintenance at Rs. 150/- per month for herself and Rs. 100/- per month to her daughter which came to be allowed. It is seen that subsequently she has filed a petition under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Criminal Misc. No. 205/2000 seeking enhancement of maintenance from Rs. 150/- to Rs. 400/- per month which came to be allowed by order dated 29.01.2001, awarding maintenance of Rs. 400/- per month. It is seen that subsequently, the present petition is filed seeking enhancement from Rs. 400/- to Rs. 2,000/- per month on the ground that the respondent has neglected to take care of his wife and though he has sufficient income, without any reason he has refused to look after the wife, therefore, she is entitled to maintenance. In the said proceedings, the Court below after recording the evidence has enhanced the maintenance award from Rs. 4,00/- to Rs. 1,000/- per month by its order dated 12.11.2009. The petitioner - wife not being satisfied with the same, has come up with the present petition seeking enhancement of the maintenance on the ground that considering the raising price and also the income of the respondent, the maintenance which is re-fixed at Rs. 1,000/- per month is on the lower side and the same requires to be enhanced.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as respondent. Perused the pleadings as well as the material available on record, along with the agreement dated 18.04.1994 which is filed this day along with the memo, there is one more document produced to show the age of the respondent, which is the certificate issued by primary school, to show the age of the respondent - husband. According to the said document presently he is aged about 71 years and the agreement dated 18.04.1994 would indicate that the petitioner herein has voluntarily left the company of the husband on the ground that there is compatibility between them. While leaving company of her husband, she has taken the daughter, born in the wedlock with the respondent and she had received a sum of Rs. 6,000/-, as permanent alimony and it is seen that in spite of giving an undertaking that she is not entitled to seek any maintenance, subsequent to the date of agreement she has filed petition in Criminal Misc. No. 145/1994. Immediately thereafter, she secured maintenance of Rs. 150/- per month and subsequently by filing petition under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure she has secured enhancement of Rs. 150/- to Rs. 400/- per month and thereafter, in the present Criminal Misc. No. 287/2007 she has secured enhancement of Rs. 400/- to Rs. 1,000/- per month. In fact she is not entitled to any maintenance from the husband subsequent to the agreement of settlement between herself and her husband on 18.04.1994. If the pleadings in Criminal Misc. No. 287/2007 is viewed, from the contents of agreement dated 18.04.1994, it is clearly seen that the allegation that respondent -husband has failed to maintain her is nothing but a false settlement made by her before the Court below for the sake of securing maintenance. Suppressing the fact that an agreement was entered into between the parties, wherein the petitioner - wife had given up her right to seek maintenance by receiving permanent alimony as on 18.04.1994.

In that view of the matter, this Court feel no grounds are made out to seek enhancement, since the respondent husband has not challenged the order dated 12.11.2009 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 287/2007. This Court would not make any observation regarding the entitlement of the wife to receive the same from the respondent. Accordingly, this revision petition is hereby dismissed.