Mrs. Chaithra Vs Mr. Mahesh

MRS.CHAITHRA, W/O SRI.MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, D/O DAYANANDA KHARVI, R/O DOOR NO.3-296, “BHAVANI KRUPA”, SANDISPIT, BENGRE, MANGALURU TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA, DISTRICT-572 201.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI.K.PRASANNA SHETTY., ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

AND:

¶16

MR.MAHESH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O LATE DEVADAS KHARVI, R/O KHARVI KERI, NEAR MAHAKALI TEMPLE, KUNDAPURA, KASABA VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-572 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI.B.S.SACHIN., ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.11.2021 PASSED IN M.C.NO.205/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia)(ib) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955.

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and

¶25

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent.

¶29

The matter was referred for mediation between the parties, which mediation took place at the Mangaluru Mediation Centre, Dakshina Kannada. In the mediation proceedings, the parties have entered into a settlement which has been recorded in a memorandum of settlement and which has been placed before us today. The terms of a settlement are as under:-

¶30

"MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE READ WITH RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDIATION) RULES 2005.

¶31

The Parties above named respectfully submit as follows:

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The aforesaid petition was referred to mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties. In the course of mediation, they have resolved their dispute and have agreed to the following terms and conditions.

¶35

1. That marriage between the Appellant and Respondent was performed on 04.06.2015 at 'Shre Sukruthindra Kalyana Mandir, Pete Shree Venkatramana Temple, Kundapura, Udupi District as per customs and traditions prevailing in their community in the presence of family members, friends and relatives of both the parties. That there is one female child by name THANIRIKA (DOB - 28/03/2016) who is now aged 9 years and she is in custody of Appellant.

¶36

2. That as there was irreconcilable differences between the parties and there is no conjugal relationship between the parties from the past 9 years till this date. The marriage between the parties has broken down completely and there is no scope of them living together as husband and wife.

¶37

3. The Appellant had filed an application for divorce seeking dissolution of her marriage with the Respondent before the Hon'ble Prl.

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Family Court, Mangaluru in M.C.No.205/2018 under the provisions of section 13(1)(1-a)(1b) of Hindu Marriage Act and same was dismissed as per judgment and decree dated 29.11.2021 by the Hon'ble Family Court. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree of the Hon'ble Family Court the Appellant preferred an appeal which is numbered as MFA No.3794/2022 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and the Hon'ble High Court was pleased to refer the matter to Mediation for resolving the disputes between the Appellant and the Respondent. During the course of mediation, the Appellant and the Respondent amicably decided to dissolve the marriage. During Mediation, the parties have mutually agreed to dissolve their marriage on the following terms and conditions:

¶41

4. Terms & Conditions:

¶42

a) That both the Appellant and the Respondent give up their rights to claim any maintenance as against each other and both agreed that they have no claim of whatsoever either past, present or future against each other.

¶43

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

b) That both the Appellant and the Respondent undertake that they will not in any way interfere with/disturb the lives of each other in future. That both parties agreed not to interfere in the personal life of each other or their family either directly or indirectly or through social media or through any third person.

¶46

c) That the minor child by name THANIRIKA, is in the sole custody of Appellant and the Respondent has got only visitation right once in two months at the place decided by them and the Respondent shall inform the younger brother of the Appellant by name Nishan (9148361691) two days before exercising such visitation right.

¶47

d) That the Respondent has agreed to pay a sum of 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) per month as maintenance to his daughter THANIRIKA. The Respondent may deposit the said amount in a nationalized bank and the deposit receipt shall be handed over to the Appellant or personally to his daughter at the time of his visitation.

¶48

e) That all the golden articles belonging to the Appellant and the Respondent have

¶49

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

been exchanged by them in the presence of their counsels today and apart from this they shall not have any claim towards any movable or immovable properties of each other or any other right.

¶52

5. The Appellant and the Respondent state that they have settled their disputes amicably and that they have received all their belongings from each other respectively.

¶53

6. In view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, both the parties pray that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dissolve the marriage of the Appellant and the Respondent performed on 04.06.2015 at 'Shre Sukruthindra Kalyana Mandir, Pete Shree Venkatramana Temple, Kundapura, Udupi District by granting a Decree of divorce, on terms of this agreement.

¶54

7. Parties will appear before the Honorable High Court of Karnataka for passing necessary Orders.

¶55

However, we find that the petition filed before the

¶56

Trial Court was under Section 13(1),(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Under the circumstances, since the

¶57

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

comprehensive decree is required to be passed after looking into the memorandum of settlement in its entirety and after considering an appropriate application made by the parties, seeking dissolution of marriage, we deem it fit to direct that the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2021 passed in M.C.No.205/2018 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru be set aside. This is necessary in view of the settlement entered into between the parties during mediation.

¶60

The matter is remitted to the concerned Family Court with a direction to consider the memorandum of settlement entered into between the parties during mediation proceedings and pass appropriate orders as well as the decree in terms of a compromise after due verification.

¶61

The Registry is directed to send trial Court records and the original memorandum of settlement entered into between the parties during mediation within a week from today to the Family Court Judge who is requested to consider the matter as expeditiously as possible.

¶62

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:40939-DB MFA No. 3794 of 2022

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

The parties shall approach the Court concerned on

¶65

04.11.2025 along with a certified copy of this order. If 04.11.2025 is a holiday in the District Court or the Court is not available, the parties shall appear on the next working day and shall be present in Court when the Court assembles. It is open for the parties to move appropriate application seeking appropriate relief before the Family Court.

¶66

Subject to the aforesaid observations, this appeal

¶67

stands disposed of.

¶68

Sd/(JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE

¶69

Sd/(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶70

KG

¶71

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Mrs. Chaithra v. Mr. Mahesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Chaithra v. Mr. Mahesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Ekta Singh Vs Dr Rajeev Giri

Smt. S H Meenakshi Vs Sri G Biskurappa @ Puttaswamaiah

Dr. Kailash M S Vs Dr. Chandrika K v

State of Karnataka Vs Danone Narang Beverages

Sri Dilbag Singh Vs Smt. Sumana C v

Sri H D Ramesh Vs the Commissioner