Dismissed¶31

Sri Raghu @ Durgarpasad v. Smt Yashoda

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2025RPFC/126/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Raghu @ Durgarpasad v. Yashoda and minors Vinod and Ruchita (represented by mother Yashoda); NC: 2025:KHC:21168; RPFC No. 126 of 2022; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; Lalitha Kanneganti J.; 18 June 2025; maintenance; Section 125 Cr.P.C.; Section 19(4) Family Courts Act 1973; Crl.Misc.No.68/2020 Principal Judge Family Court Chikkamagaluru; order dated 21.04.2022 partly allowing maintenance; dismissal as withdrawn; settlement between parties; permanent alimony already paid; pending I.As. closed; advocates Girish B Baladare (petitioner), K. Ashuri Prabhu for A. Madhusudhana Rao (respondents).

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri Raghu @ Durgarpasad Vs Smt Yashoda — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:21168 RPFC No. 126 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶8

REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 126 OF 2022

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI RAGHU @ DURGARPASAD S/O SIDDAPA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS BIKE MECHANIC, RANGANATH AUTOWORKS R/O VIJAYAPURA MAIN ROAD CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 101

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SMT. YASHODA W/O RAGHU @ DURGAPARASAD D/O SANNAPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

¶15

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

MASTER VINOD S/O RAGHU @ DURGAPARASAD AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS

¶17

MISS RUCHITA D/O RAGHU @ DURGAPARASAD AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS

¶18

PETITIONER NOS.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1

¶19

ALL ARE R/O HULIKERE VILLAGE PILLENAHALLI POST, SAKRAYAPATNA HOBLI, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 101

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC:21168 RPFC No. 126 of 2022

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

(BY SRI. K.ASHURI PRABHU, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.A.MADHUSUDHANA RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶25

THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1973, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.04.2022 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.NO.68/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF Cr.P.C FOR MAINTENANCE.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo stating that the disputes between the parties have been already settled and permanent alimony is already paid and nothing needs to be adjudicated in this petition. Hence, seeks for withdrawal of the petition.

¶30

Memo is taken on record.

¶31

Accordingly, RPFC is Dismissed as withdrawn .

¶32

All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed.

¶33

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶34

TS List No.: 3 Sl No.: 11

Sri Raghu @ Durgarpasad v. Smt Yashoda

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri Raghu @ Durgarpasad v. Smt Yashoda

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumari Abha Sinha Vs Mr Deepak Kumar Sinha

Mrs. Hemalatha @ Hemavathi Vs Mr. Kusumakar Shetty

Mr. Vishen Vinay Kumar Vs Smt. Deeshma G

Sri Ravishankar K S Vs Smt. Ashwini K S

Sri Avin Chandran Vs Smt Usha Kumari @ Usha Pillai

Sri Y N Siddesh Vs Smt Y K Gowramma @ Dhanalakshmi