The Karnataka High Court has upheld a Family Court's order directing a husband to pay ₹20,000 per month as interim maintenance to his wife and minor son, observing that the amount could not be considered excessive for a person who admitted to maintaining a Mercedes-Benz car. In the same judgment, the Division Bench also dismissed the husband's appeal seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, holding that the wife had reasonable cause to live separately.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a matrimonial dispute between wife and husband, who married on 22 February 2009 and have a son together. The husband approached the Family Court seeking dissolution of marriage under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging that his wife had treated him with cruelty and deserted him for several years.
The wife denied the allegations and claimed that she had been subjected to physical and mental harassment. She further alleged that the husband was involved in a relationship with another woman, which compelled her to live separately. The Family Court rejected the husband's divorce petition and separately granted interim maintenance of ₹20,000 per month to the wife and child.
Court's Observations
A Division Bench comprising Justice Jayant Banerji and Justice T.M. Nadaf found no reason to interfere with the Family Court's findings.
The Court noted that the husband had produced only limited evidence to support his allegations of cruelty, whereas the Family Court had examined photographs and other material relied upon by the wife. It observed that the husband failed to satisfactorily explain the photographs that had been produced during the proceedings, and the Family Court was justified in assessing the evidence on the standard of preponderance of probabilities.
On the issue of desertion, the Bench explained that desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act requires a spouse to live apart without reasonable cause and against the wishes of the other spouse.
"There is reasonable cause for the respondent-wife to live apart," the Bench observed while agreeing with the Family Court's conclusion.
The judges further remarked that granting divorce in the facts of the case would effectively reward the party found responsible for the marital breakdown.
"Any exception to the Judgment and Decree passed by the Family Court would amount to rewarding premium to the wrong doer," the Bench observed.
The husband had also challenged the interim maintenance order passed in separate proceedings.
The High Court declined to interfere, observing that the Family Court had considered the family's financial status before fixing the amount. The Bench also referred to the husband's own admission regarding maintaining a Mercedes-Benz car and held that payment of ₹20,000 per month could not be considered excessive in the circumstances. The Court left it open to the wife to initiate execution proceedings if the amount is not paid and directed the Family Court to dispose of the pending maintenance case expeditiously.
Decision
The Karnataka High Court dismissed both the husband's appeal against the refusal of divorce and his writ petition challenging the interim maintenance order.
The Court affirmed the Family Court's findings that the husband had failed to establish cruelty or desertion and confirmed the direction to pay ₹20,000 per month as interim maintenance to the wife and their minor son.
Case Details
Case Title: Wife and Husband
Case Number: MFA No. 5567 of 2024 c/w W.P. No. 21524 of 2024
Judges: Justice Jayant Banerji and Justice T.M. Nadaf
Decision Date: 10 July 2026
