Dismissed¶45

Sri Narayanan v. Vs Smt Ashwini L S

Karnataka HC12 Jun 2025RP/115/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC Bengaluru; RP No. 115 of 2025 (NC: 2025:KHC:20228); review petition dismissed; Order 47 Rule 1 CPC 1908; review sought of order dated 25.03.2024 in WP 5062/2019 c/w WP 15813/2019 and WP 15814/2019; rental deposit Rs.1,00,000; monthly rent Rs.20,000; handover of TV, sofa, fridge, washing machine, cot, kitchen utensils; restraint on sale of matrimonial house without court permission; M.C. No.1049/2018; M.C. No.3273/2018 to be disposed within six months; wife filed execution; contentions left open to Executing Court; Narayanan V v. Ashwini L.S; Lalitha Kanneganti J; 12 June 2025.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted to the petitioner; the Review Petition was dismissed, all contentions were left open to the parties to agitate before the Executing Court, and all IAs in the petition stand closed. ¶45

Sri Narayanan v Vs Smt Ashwini L S — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:20228 RP No. 115 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REVIEW PETITION NO. 115 OF 2025 (-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. NARAYANAN V, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O VISWANATHAN NARAYANASAMY IYER, RESIDING AT 2/23, "SHRUSTI", 2ND CROSS, 12TH MAIN, GREEN GARDEN, NEAR JUBILEE SCHOOL, NRI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 036.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. NIDHISHREE B.V, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SMT. ASHWINI L.S, W/O NARAYANAN V., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT GROUND FLOOR 22/23, "SHRUSTI", 2ND CROSS, 12TH MAIN, GREEN GARDEN, NEAR JUBILEE SCHOOL, NRI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 036.

¶15

(BY SRI. BALASUBRAMANYA B.N, ADVOCATE)

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 25.03.2024 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO.5062 OF 2019 DATED 25.03.2024 (COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THIS HOBLE COURT IN WP NO. 5062/2019 C/W WP NO. 15813/2019 AND WP NO. 15814/2019) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE A.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:20228 RP No. 115 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS

¶22

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The Review Petition is filed seeking review of the order dated 25.03.2024, whereby this Court had passed the following operative portion of the order:

¶26

i) The husband shall pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/towards rental deposit, an amount of Rs.20,000/towards monthly rent and the wife is at liberty to take a premises of her choice.

¶27

ii) By April’25^th 2024, the husband shall pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.20,000/- to the wife and continue to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- rent every month.

¶28

iii) The husband shall handover TV, Sofa, Fridge, Washing Machine, Cot and also the kitchen utensils to the wife in the presence of Sri. N.R.Naik Advocate for the Respondent.

¶29

iv) The husband cannot sell the matrimonial house without seeking permission of the court and this will not amount to acknowledging any of the rights of the wife to the property.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:20228 RP No. 115 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

v) Accordingly W.P.No.5062/2019 and W.P. No.15814 / 2019 is disposed of.

¶34

vi) In the light of the order passed in W.P. No.5062/2019 no further orders are required to be passed in W.P.No.15813/2019 and accordingly closed.

¶35

vii) Considering the litigation between the parties, and the kind of criminal proceedings that are initiated between the parties the court below is directed to dispose of the pending M.C. No.1049/2018 and M.C. No.3273/2018 as expeditiously as possible but not later than six months.

¶36

viii) Accordingly disposed off.

¶37

It is submitted that now the wife has filed execution

¶38

and it is the case of the husband that though the husband is ready to comply with the conditions, the wife has failed to co-operate and learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has put forth certain other grounds and it is stated that the order needs to be clarified/reviewed. This Court has perused the order and the grounds that are raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶39

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:20228 RP No. 115 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42