Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF JULY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.45022/2016 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN: Neeta Golcha @ Neeta Merlecha, D/o. Parasmal Merlecha, 41 years, R/at No.460, 1st Floor, Ashoka Pillar, 2nd Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru – 560 011.
…Petitioner
(By Sri.Kiran S.Javali, Adv. on behalf of Sri. Mallan Goud, H., Advocate)
AND:
Rajiv Golcha, S/o. Omprakash Golcha, 42 years, R/at Apt. No.605, Sparta, 1, Prestige Acropolis, Next to Forum Mall, Koramangala, Bengaluru – 560 029.
...Respondent
(By Sri.Prabhu Goud Tumbigi, Adv. on behalf of Sri. Balasubramanya B.N., Advocate)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the Order on IA filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act dated 17.06.2016 (Annexure-A) and direct the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.75,000/- towards the legal expenses as an
- 2 - interim means (passed by VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru) and etc.
This Writ petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R
Order dated 17.06.2016 passed in M.C.No.2854/2015 by the VI Addl. Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, allowing the application filed by the petitioner herein under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in part by awarding litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- as against claim of Rs.75,000/- is being assailed in this writ petition.
Having heard Sri. Kiran S. Javali, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. H.Mallan Goud and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case and the respective pleadings as urged by both the parties before the trial Court it would clearly indicate that on account of certain differences and dispute having arisen between the parties to the marriage which came to be solemnized on 27.04.1996 resulted in respondent-husband herein filing a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for dissolution of said marriage. During
- 3 - the course of the proceedings before the trial Court an application under Section 24 came to be filed by the petitioner-wife herein seeking litigation expenses of Rs.75,000/-. Said application having been resisted to by the respondent herein contending that wife is an income tax assessee having Permanent Account Number issued by the Income Tax Department and for the assessment year 2011- 12 her gross total declared income was Rs.4,62,690/- and she had a capital balance of Rs.17,75,328/- rejected the said plea on the ground that husband had not produced any material to show the exact income of his wife and photocopy produced by the petitioner-husband cannot be accepted for arriving at a conclusion. Hence, it came to be held that the wife is entitled to claim litigation expenses and has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- for the reasons assigned in paragraph 9 of the impugned order.
Sri. Kiran S. Javali, learned counsel, having initially contended that petitioner was entitled to be awarded atleast Rs.75,000/- as litigation expenses on the ground that cost of litigation had increased enormously has been
- 4 - fair in contending that if some reasonable amount is granted petitioner would be satisfied.
Though Sri. Prabhu Goud Tumbigi, learned counsel for respondent opposes for awarding litigation expenses as claimed in the application filed before trial court he would also fairly submit that respondent-husband is ready and willing to pay Rs.20,000/-. His submission is placed on record. Hence, taking into consideration that petitioner-wife cannot be made to seek financial assistance from her parents, this Court is of the considered view and the ends of justice would be met if respondent-husband is directed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses to petitioner-wife. Hence the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is hereby allowed in part.
(ii) I.A. filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, Annexure-C is hereby allowed in part and impugned order dated 17.06.2016 is hereby modified and respondent-husband is directed to pay litigation expenses of
- 5 - Rs.30,000/- expeditiously at any rate within 4 weeks from today by either drawing DD in the name of petitioner herein or depositing the said amount before the trial Court in the pending M.C.No.2854/2014.
(iii) Since, the litigation between the parties is pending since 2015, trial court shall take effective steps to expeditiously dispose of the said petition at any rate within one year from today, subject to both parties co-operating, which the learned counsel appearing for both parties have averred that it will be extended.
Any observation made by this Court in this order is limited for the purpose of examining correctness and legality of the impugned order only. All issues kept open to be agitated by the parties before the jurisdictional Family Court.
SD/- JUDGE
SV/-