Allowed¶35

Sri. Pawan Kumar T.S. v. Smt. Rashmi M

Karnataka HC10 Jan 2025MFA/7065/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Consent dissolution of marriage; compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC r/w Section 13B Hindu Marriage Act; permanent alimony `23 lakhs; mutual withdrawal of cases; parties separated since 29.10.2017; marriage of 23.11.2016 dissolved; M.C. No. 6275/2017 allowed; impugned Family Court judgment dated 28.09.2021 set aside; MFA No. 7065/2021 (FC); NC: 2025:KHC:1055-DB; High Court of Karnataka.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment and decree dated 28.09.2021 set aside; M.C. No. 6275/2017 allowed in terms of the compromise petition; marriage solemnized on 23.11.2016 dissolved; respondent to receive `23 lakhs as permanent alimony and withdraw all cases against the appellant-husband; appellant to withdraw the case/s filed against the respondent-wife. ¶35

Sri. Pawan Kumar T.S. Vs Smt. Rashmi M — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:1055-DB MFA No. 7065/2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7065/2021 (FC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. PAWAN KUMAR T.S. AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS S/O LATE T R SRINIVASAN R/AT 122, 7^TH MAIN, 21^ST CROSS BTM LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SMT. SUSHEELA S, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SOMANATHA H, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SMT. RASHMI M (DEEPA) AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS W/O SRI PAWAN KUMAR T.S., D/O MANJUNATH M.S., R/AT 19/64, 5^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, BULL TEMPLE ROAD, N R COLONY BENGALURU - 560 019

¶15

AND C/O COGZY TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD., NO.1563, 3^RD FLOOR, 8TH CROSS OPPOSITE BMTC BUS STOP CHANDRA LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 040

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI. LINGARAJ S SARAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR C/RESPONDENT)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:1055-DB MFA No. 7065/2021

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.09.2021 PASSED IN MC NO. 6275/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(i)(a) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 AND ETC.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and

¶23

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

(PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

¶26

Smt. Susheela S., learned Senior Counsel appears for Sri.Somanath H., learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Lingaraj S. Sarapur, learned counsel appears for the respondent.

¶27

The parties are duly identified by their respective advocates on record.

¶28

The parties submit the compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 r/w Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1055-DB MFA No. 7065/2021

¶30

Heard the parties on the compromise petition. Both

¶31

the parties admit voluntary execution of the compromise petition and terms of the same.

¶32

Respondent admits the terms of the compromise petition, that she has agreed for dissolution of marriage on receiving a sum of `23 lakhs as permanent alimony and she has agreed to withdraw all the cases filed against the appellanthusband. The appellant also submits that he has agreed to withdraw the case/s filed against the respondent-wife and for dissolution of marriage.

¶33

Parties submit that they are staying separately from 29.10.2017. Therefore, the requirement of Section 13B of the Act that the parties should be living separately since one year prior to the presentation of the petition is already satisfied. Satisfied that the compromise is voluntary and admissible under law. Therefore, recording the same, Court passes the following :

¶34

ORDER

¶35

i) The appeal is allowed.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:1055-DB MFA No. 7065/2021

¶38

ii) Impugned Judgment is hereby set aside.

¶39

iii. M.C. No.6275/2017 on the file of II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru is allowed in terms of the compromise petition.

¶40

iv. The marriage of the petitioner and the respondent solemnized on 23.11.2016 at Sri Ragigudda Shri Prasanna Anjaneyaswamy Charitable Trust, Jayanagar, 9^th Block, Bengaluru is hereby dissolved.

¶41

Draw Decree in terms of the compromise petition.

¶42

Sd/(K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE

¶43

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶44

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Sri. Pawan Kumar T.S. v. Smt. Rashmi M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Pawan Kumar T.S. v. Smt. Rashmi M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Poojary Vs Bharathi Bhat

Sri Valerian Rajesh Lobo Vs the United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Sri Prakash S B Vs Smt Vijayalakshmi

Sri M U Pradeepkumar Vs Smt H N Swetha

Smt Gangamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Legal Manager Vs Vinaya Kumar