Karnataka High Court
Sri Vinod Sesadri vs Smt Anita Vinod on 5 October, 2020
Bench: B.V.Nagarathna, N S Sanjay Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
M.F.A.No.5628/2015 (FC) C/w
M.F.A.No.1276/2017 (FC)
BETWEEN:
Sri. Vinod Sesadri,
Aged about 48 years,Son of K.V.Sheshadri,
Residing at Giri Kunj, 5-A, 201,
New Mhada, Film City Road,
Dindoshi, Gurgaon(East)
Mumbai - 400 101. ... Appellant
(Common)
(By Smt. Pramila Nesargi, Senior Counsel for
Sri.Hemanth Kumar.D, Advocate)
AND:
Smt. Anita Vinod,
Aged about 43 years, Daughter of P.L.Sharma,
Residing at H-28, Panchatara Building,
5th Cross, 1st Stage, Naidu Layout,
KVP Nagar, Jalahalli East,
Bengaluru - 560 013. ... Respondent
(Common)
(By Miss. Vidyashree.K.S. for Haranahalli Law Partners,
Advocate)
2
M.F.A.No.5628/2015 is filed under Section 19(1) of
the Family Courts Act against the Judgment and Decree
dated:10.03.2015 passed in M.C.NO.2645/2012 on the
file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru,
dismissing the petition filed under Section 13(1)(ia) of
the Hindu Marriage Act.
M.F.A.No.1276/2017 is filed under Section 19(1) of
the Family Courts Act against the Judgment and Decree
dated:05.01.2017 passed in M.C.NO.3212/2014 on the
file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru,
allowing the petition filed under Section 9 of Hindu
Marriage Act.
These appeals coming on for Admission this day,
NAGARATHNA, J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
1. MFA.No.5628/2015 is filed by the husband assailing the judgment and decree passed in MC.No.2645/2012 dated 10.03.2015 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru which was a petition filed under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity). By the judgment and decree, the petition filed by the husband was dismissed. Hence, this appeal.
3
2. MFA.No.1276/2017 is filed by the very same appellant/husband assailing the judgment and decree passed in MC.No.3212/2014 dated 05.01.2017 by the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru which was a petition filed by the respondent/wife under Section 9 of the Act seeking for restitution of conjugal rights. By the said judgment and decree, the said petition has been allowed. Hence, the appellant/husband has preferred this appeal.
3. Since the appeals pertain to the same parties, they have been clubbed together.
4. Smt. Pramila Nesargi, learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that since the judgment and decree passed in M.C.No.3212/2014 dated 05.01.2017 has not been complied with and there has been no restitution of conjugal rights between the parties, the appellant/husband intends to seek relief under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act. She further submitted that in order to file such a petition, it may not 4 be permissible to assail the judgment and decree passed in M.C.No.3212/2014 dated 05.01.2017. She further submitted that the said judgment and decree would be the basis for filing a petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, the appellant may be permitted to withdraw these appeals reserving liberty to the appellant/husband to file a petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act before the competent Court. Liberty may also be reserved to the appellant to revive these appeals in the event the appellant is unsuccessful in the petition to be filed by him before the competent Court.
5. Submission of the learned Senior Counsel is placed on record.
6. In the above circumstances, these appeals are permitted to be withdrawn so as to enable the appellant/husband to file a petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act. Liberty is also reserved to the appellant/husband to revive these appeals in case of necessity and if it is so advised.
5
Ordered accordingly.
In view of the disposal of the appeals pending applications stand disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE KTY