Disposed

Smt.Dr. Sphoorthi Basavannaiah v. Sri Arjun Raj B

Karnataka HC12 Feb 2021MFA/2343/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an appeal filed against a Section 9 decree by condoning a two-day delay. The court reserved liberty for the appellant to file a divorce petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) and sought protective orders, subordinating the appeal's determination.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed; liberty granted to file petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act; liberty to revive this appeal if unsuccessful.

Smt.Dr. Sphoorthi Basavannaiah Vs Sri Arjun Raj B — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA

¶8

M.F.A. No.2343/2020 (FC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. DR. SPHOORTHI BASAVANNAIAH W/O ARJUN RAJ B. AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT #S-7, 2^ND FLOOR, B BLOCK, STAFF QUARTERS, SUBBAIAH INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES NH-13, PURLE, HOLEBENAVALLI POST, SHIMOGA - 577 222. ... APPELLANT

¶11

(BY MISS K.M. SAI APABHARANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ASHOK G.V., ADVOCATE (THROUGH V/C))

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI. ARJUN RAJ .B S/O. B. BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, #1126, 6^TH MAIN, CHADURANGA ROAD, K-BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE - 570 022. ... RESPONDENT

¶14

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.11.2019 PASSED IN M.C.NO.98/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.

¶15

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR OREDERS THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

¶16

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

There is a delay of two days in filing the appeal. We

¶19

have, nevertheless, heard learned counsel, Ms. Sai Apabharana, learned counsel appearing for Sri Ashok G.V. learned counsel for the appellant/wife.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that M.C.No.263/2018 was filed by the appellant/wife under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for the sake of brevity) seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion, while the respondent/husband filed M.C.No.98/2018 against the appellant under Section 9 of the Act. The I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at Mysuru by judgment and decree dated 05/11/2019 has allowed the petition filed by the respondent/husband under Section 9 of the Act, while dismissing the petition filed by the appellant/wife under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Act. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that the impugned judgment and decree is

¶22

¶23

dated 05/11/2019 and there has been no order of stay of the judgment and decree of restitution of conjugal rights passed by this Court since then. In the circumstances, appellant's counsel submitted that liberty may be granted to the appellant to file a petition seeking dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act and reserving liberty to the appellant herein to revive this appeal in the event the appellant is unsuccessful in that petition. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the respondent is seeking execution of the decree of restitution of conjugal rights granted under Section 9 of the Act, whereas, the appellant has the right to seek divorce under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act. In the circumstances, protective orders may be made in that regard.

¶24

Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is placed on record.

¶25

In view of the aforesaid submission, this appeal is disposed by reserving liberty to the appellant to file a petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act. In the event the appellant is unsuccessful in the said proceeding, liberty is reserved to the appellant to revive this appeal.

¶26

¶27

If such a proceeding is filed by the appellant,

¶28

the appellant is also entitled to seek interim protective orders as against the respondent in the said proceeding.

¶29

In the event the appellant seeks an interim order for stay of the execution proceeding in a petition to be filed under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act, the Family Court to consider the same having regard to the object and purpose of Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act and in accordance with law.

¶30

8. The appeal is disposed in the aforesaid terms.

¶31

Consequently, the delay of two days in filing the appeal is ignored. I.A.Nos.1/2020 and 2/2020 are

disposed.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

Smt.Dr. Sphoorthi Basavannaiah v. Sri Arjun Raj B

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Dr. Sphoorthi Basavannaiah v. Sri Arjun Raj B

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The National Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Dr Uma Suresh

Dr. L Ranganath Vs Karnataka Veterinary

Sri Chandrashekar Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. G. Geetha Vs Sri. Lokesh @ Munianjinappa

Mr. Yathiraj P R Vs Sindushree (Lakshmi)

Smt. Kamalamma Vs the State of Karnataka