Petitioner challenged an interim order restraining Respondent and others from causing threats. Court clarified the order was cautioning, not stigma-inducing, and disposed the petition.
Petition disposed off with clarification that the order is of cautioning nature and does not cast any stigma.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.19030 OF 2021(GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. DR.VIDYA L P, W/O DR. BHARATHRAJ M Y, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, NO.384/2, 4TH MAIN, 8TH CROSS, P J EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE – 577 002.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANTOSH R NELKUDRUI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
DR. BHARATHRAJ M Y, S/O YOGESH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, NO.184/2, 4TH MAIN, 8TH CROSS, P J EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE – 577 002.
… RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.09.2020 PASSED ON IA NO.I IN M.C.NO.183/2020 ON THE FILE OF JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE VIDE ANNX-D. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The short grievance of the petitioner is against the
interim order dated 18.09.2020 passed by the learned Family Court Judge, Davanagere, the said order has the following text:
2
“I.A.No.I filed by the petitioner under Sec.151 of CPC is hereby allowed. The respondent, her parents and henchmen are hereby restrained from causing threat to the petitioner till disposal of the case. No order as to cost.”
this order of the kind could not have been made since it gives an impression that petitioner is perpetrating the acts of threat and that it will have a bearing on the ongoing main mater itself.
petitioner and having perused the petition papers, it is made clear that the impugned order is of cautioning nature and shall not be construed as putting any stigma on the stakeholders in the matter in the Court below nor shall it cast a shadow on the intended talks for amicable settlement. Petition is disposed off with the above clarification.
Sd/JUDGE
Bsv
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the interim order of cautioning nature against threats casts a stigma on the petitioner and begging the question of the main matter.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SMT. DR.VIDYA L P
DR. BHARATHRAJ M Y
KRISHNA S.DIXIT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
