BETWEEN:

Age: Narayan

R/o Dist.

And (by

Age: Smt.

R/o No.

(by Act

Judge passed petition

THE

THE

Sri

Sri Hebballi,

52/3,

52

against c/p

47 -580

Sujata

This

IN

B.K.

HON’BLE

years, A.B.

years,

HON’BLE

ON in

(Sr. s/o

Raju filed

THE

CIRCUIT

Keshwapur,

M.C. appeal

Malligwad,

THE

Bhandekar, w/o

Subhanappa

the M.F.A.

Tq. Dn.)

u/S

Harishchandra 0cc.:

HIGH

0cc.:

judgment

No.

Narayan

Dharwad.

30th

MR.

MR. is 13

001.

&

Service,

BENCH

Household No.

24/1999

COURT

filed

of

DAY

JUSTICE BEFORE

C.J.M.

Hubli-580 Advocate)

JUSTICE

the AND :1:

4595/2006

Advocate)

Kotabagi,

Kotabagi, u/S

and

OF

Hindu

AT

OF

Gaikwad,

on

Dharwad 28

MARCH

work,

decree DHARWAD

K.

KARNATAKA

RAVI

020. the

of

Marriage

L.

the

(MC)

file

MANJUNATH

dated -

MALIMATH

2012 - Hindu

dismissing of

Act,

the

Respondent

31.01.2006

Appellant

Marriage

Prl.

etc.

Civil

the THIS

FOLLOWING:

PrI.

I.

dismissing

Act

2.

appellant

lived birth

the

husband

rights

Cr1.

the

Accordingly

Civil

seeking

husband

THIS

ground Misc. Aggrieved

to

together DAY,

The

but

3

Judge

and

filed children.

the

APPEAL the facts

174/95

divorce,

RAW

that and

the

husband’s maintenance

comfortably

M.C.

petition

(Sr.

by

respondent

would

left

her

was

After

the Dn.)

this

MALIMATH,

No.

COMING

to

husband

JUDGMENT filed

was

order

appeal

petition

her &

disclose

1990,

2

:2:

1/93

was

till CJM,

by

dismissed

took

parents’

dated

is the the the

has

ordered. ON

seeking

u/S

filed place Dharwad

that

wife wife

year

31.01.2006

neglected

FOR J,

13

house.

by

for

on the

of

seeking started

DELIVERED restitution 1990.

the

Thereafter

FINAL the

default, 17.06.1978

in

marriage

husband.

Subsequently M.C.

Hindu

to

quarrelling

passed

The

maintenance

maintain HEARING

of No.

wife

the Marriage

Thereafter

between and

conjugal

by

/

24/99 THE

present

gave

they

with the

her. the

on petition

wife

3. maintenance

been petition

was wife

consequently

Consequently

ground

facts maintain

of

Court

any interference

has

desertion

allowed

a

The

would that

error

has neglect below

for deserted

of

his

facts desertion

her

been

maintenance

has

show granting

committed

wife.

in

has

would

present an

at

husband

this

been the would filed

the

rightly

that

order

Hence

husband.

appeal.

does

maintenance.

not

filed in hands

the

petition

disclose

has

the

by has dismissed

not

lie.

husband

the has

purely

:3:

been

year

of

have the

neglected

petition

Under

the

been

filed

that

2006 filed,

on

Court

legs

has

It husband the

the

is

the

by for passed

these

deliberately on to

petition.

On the

to

ground

below

divorce stand.

the

the

Cr1.

contest

specific

maintain

and

circumstances.

ground

husband

to

Misc,

Admittedly

that

that We therefore

on

that

the

neglected

case

the

there

do

that

her seeking

calls petition

on

ground

not effect. of

the

has

and the

the

the

the

the

see

for

to :4:

For the aforesaid reasonsthe appeal is dismissed.

Sdf—

Sd/ 3UDGE bvv