Dismissed

Sri. T. Suresh v. Smt. R. C. Rajalakshmi

Karnataka HC14 Aug 2023CRL.RP/683/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Bengaluru dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by a husband against maintenance and order decrees. The court noted the petitioner's absence on the final day and failure to file a calculation memorandum on payment of arrears, concluding the matter was dodged by the petitioner, leading to dismissal for non-prosecution.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sri. T. Suresh Vs Smt. R. C. Rajalakshmi — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:28872 CRL.RP No. 683 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 683 OF 2019

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. T. SURESH, S/O LATE TEEKACHAR, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT D NO.1517, 2^ND CROSS, KOLADASANDI BEEDI, LASHKAR MOHALLA, MYSURU-570 001.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. KEMPARAJU, ADVOCATE(ABSENT))

¶10

AND:

¶11

SMT. R. C. RAJALAKSHMI W/O T. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶12

Digitally signed by RENUKAMBA K G

¶13

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

KUM S. SUSHMITA D/O T. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS,

¶15

MASTER S. VARSHITRAJ S/O T. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.3 IS MINOR, REP: BY 1^ST RESPONDENT/MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN

¶16

RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE R/AT NO.2478/1, K26, II CROSS,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:28872 CRL.RP No. 683 of 2019

¶19

HOSABANDIKERI, MYSURU-570 001.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(R1 AND R3 ARE SERVED V/O DTD:30.06.2023;

¶22

R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶23

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2019 MADE IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.251/2018, ON THE FILE OF I- ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU AND THE ORDER DATED 20.04.2015, MADE IN CRL.MISC.NO.2/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS (III COURT), MYSURU.

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The learned counsel for the revision petitioner is absent.

¶27

Though the respondents are served, they

¶28

remained un-represented.

¶29

All along it is submitted by the learned counsel for

¶30

the revision petitioner that, the matter has been settled and time was sought for reporting settlement, and in that regard, on the last occasion ie., on 30.06.2023, he undertook to submit a Memo of Calculation regarding

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC:28872 CRL.RP No. 683 of 2019

¶32

¶33

payment of arrears of maintenance, and that was also not done.

¶34

This is a revision filed by the husband and from

¶35

his conduct it is clear that, he is dodging the matter in one or other way. Hence, the revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

KGR* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Sri. T. Suresh v. Smt. R. C. Rajalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. T. Suresh v. Smt. R. C. Rajalakshmi

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

Sri.Chikkanna@Prem Vs Srinivasa

Sri D Sreeramaiah Vs Sri M Pattabi Naidu

Sri C D Veeresh Murthy Vs Smt. C N Bramarambha

M Sahul Hameed Vs Zeenath Banu

Manjappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Govind v Jathar Vs Smt C Radha