Nandana Bedi vs Bharat Bedi on 6 September, 2019

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Nandana Bedi vs Bharat Bedi on 6 September, 2019

Bench: Alok Aradhe

                          1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

  DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019

                      BEFORE
       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

     WRIT PETITION NO.9729 OF 2018 (GM-FC)
                      C/W
     WRIT PETITION NO.41364 of 2017 (GM-FC)

IN WP NO.9729/2018:
BETWEEN:

Nandana Bedi
W/o Bharat Bedi
Aged 35 years
Residing at No.111A, 10th Main
4th Cross, RPC Layout
Vijayanagar
Bangalore - 560 040.
                                                  ...
                                          Petitioner

(By Smt.Nithya Rajashekhar, Advocate for Sri.Rohan
    Kothari, Advocate)

AND:

Bharat Bedi
S/o late Manmohan Bedi
Aged 32 years
Residing at B-72
Puncak Prima Condominium
Jalan Sri.Hartamas 17
                            2



Sri Hartamas Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia - 50480.
                                          ... Respondent

(By   Sri.Arjun Rego,   Advocate    for   Sri.L.P.E.Rego,
      Advocate)


       This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India praying to modify the
order dated 21.03.2018 passed in M.C.No.2188/2016
by the II Additional Family Judge, Family Court,
Bangalore produced herein as Annexure-G, by
enhancing the monthly interim maintenance granted
to the petitioner to Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five
Thousand only) per month and to enhance the
litigation expenses to Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) and etc.


IN WP NO.41364/2017:
BETWEEN:


Bharat Bedi
Aged 32 years
S/o late Manmohan Bedi
Presently residing in Malaysia at
B-72, Puncak Prima Condominium
Jalan Sri.Hartamas 17
Sri Hartamas, Kuala Lumpur - 50480
Malaysia
And in India care of
Ujala Chaudhary
#2103, Aastha Kunj
Sector 3, Plot No.3, Dwarka
New Delhi - 110075
                            3



And in Bangalore care of
Sandeep Prakash
S/o H.Prakash
Presently of
#8/1, Lakshmi Road
2nd Cross, Shantinagar
Bangalore - 560 027.
                                            ...Petitioner
(By   Sri.Arjun Rego,   Advocate   for   Sri.L.P.E.Rego,
      Advocate)


AND:

Nandana Bedi
(nee) Ramani Nandana Yerapragada
Aged 34 years
W/o Bharat Bedi
and daughter of Haneef Yerapragada
Presently residing at
No.1111A, 10th Main
4th Cross, RPC Layout
Vijayanagar
Bangalore - 560 040.
                                          ...Respondent
(By Smt.Nithya Rajashekhar, Advocate for Sri.Rohan
    Kothari, Advocate)

      This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the
order dated 21.3.2017 in MC No.2188/2016 on the file
of the Hon'ble 2nd Additional Principal Judge, Family
Court, Bangalore as per the original of Annexure-A
hereto and be further pleased to dismiss the aforesaid
interlocutory application No.3 and etc.
                              4




      These Writ Petitions coming on for Preliminary
Hearing in 'B' Group, this day, the Court made the
following:-

                         ORDER

In WP No.9729/2018:

Smt.Nithya Rajashekhar, learned Counsel for Sri.Rohan Kothari, learned Counsel for petitioner.

Sri.Arjun Rego, learned Counsel for Sri.L.P.E.Rego, learned Counsel for respondent. In W.P.No.41364/2017:

Sri.Arjun Rego, learned Counsel for Sri.L.P.E.Rego, learned Counsel for petitioner.

Smt.Nithya Rajashekhar, learned Counsel for Sri.Rohan Kothari, learned Counsel for respondent.

Petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.

2. In these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner in W.P.No.9729/2018 inter alia has assailed the validity of the order dated 21.03.2018 passed by II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore in M.C.No.2188/2016 by which the respondent has been directed to pay interim maintenance @ Rs.20,000/- p.m. and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses. Whereas the petitioner in W.P.No.41364/2017 inter alia seeks quashment of the order dated 21.03.2017 in M.C.No.2188/2016 on the file of II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore.

3. When the matters are taken up today, learned Counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the matter is fixed for cross-examination of respondent/husband.

4. In view of the aforesaid submission and taking into account the fact that the matter has been set down for evidence and in view of provisions contained in Karnataka (Case Flow Management in Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2005, I deem it proper to dispose of the petitions with a direction to the trial Court to conclude the proceedings within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid direction, the petitions stand disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE Prs*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court