Two miscellaneous family appeals challenging Family Court decrees were dismissed as withdrawn after the appellant filed a memo stating a lack of interest in prosecuting the appeals.
The appeals M.F.A.No.103763/2017 and M.F.A.No.103777/2017 were dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
M.F.A.No.103763/2017 c/w M.F.A.No.103777/2017 (FC)
IN M.F.A.No.103763/2017
BETWEEN:
MUFRINTAJ W/O GULZAR AHME DIDAGUR, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: MADARMADI, IN FRONT OF SCHOOL NO.6, DHARWAD. ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.J.S.SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
GULZAR AHMED S/O INAYATULLA DIDAGUR, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB, R/O: GULAGANJIKOPPA DHARWAD, NOW R/AT: WARREN TECH CENTER, VEK PODIUM 30001 VAN DYAKE BLEEDS 2-10 POSTAL CODE: 48090-9020 FLOOR-2, WARREN CITY, UNITED STATE OF AMERICA WITH MOBILE NO.248-251-2881 AND OFFICE NO.586-335-8234. ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.AHAMED ALI J.RAHIMANSHA, ADVOCATE)
2
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19 (1) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.08.2017 PASSED IN O.S.No.10/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD, DISMISSING THE SUIT FILED FOR DECLARATION.
IN M.F.A.No.103777/2017
MUFRINTAJ W/O GULZAR AHMED DIDAGUR, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: MADARMADI, IN FRONT OF SCHOOL NO.6, DHARWAD. ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI J.S.SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND
(BY SRI.AHAMED ALI J.RAHIMANSHA, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19 (1) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.08.2017, PASSED IN O.S.No.12/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED FOR DECLARATION.
3
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, P.B.BAJANTHRI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memos
dated 16.12.2019 stating that the appellant is not
interested in prosecuting these appeals.
The said memos are taken on record and the appeals
are dismissed as withdrawn.
Consequently, all the pending IAs do not survive for consideration.
(SD/-) JUDGE
(Sd/-) JUDGE
Jm/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether appeals filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 are maintainable when the appellant has filed a memo stating they are not interested in prosecuting.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MUFRINTAJ W/O GULZAR AHME DIDAGUR
GULZAR AHMED S/O INAYATULLA DIDAGUR
AHEMADI, D/O IQBAL NAZIR HUSSAIN QUADRI
P.B.BAJANTHRI
NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
