Allowed¶42

Mrs. Hemalatha @ Hemavathi v. Mr. Kusumakar Shetty

Karnataka HC16 Jun 2025WP/19902/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recall of PW.1 for further cross-examination; setting aside of Family Court order dismissing I.A.Nos. VI and VII; M.C.No.236/2021 divorce on ground of cruelty; Principal Judge Family Court D.K. Mangaluru; failure of counsel to cross-examine despite adjournments and costs; stay of matrimonial proceedings since 2022; time-bound disposal directions; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; writ petition (GM-FC) allowed.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 17.09.2022 passed on I.A.Nos. VI and VII in M.C.No.236/2021 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangaluru set aside; I.A.Nos. VI and VII allowed, enabling cross-examination of PW.1; parties directed to appear before the Family Court by 01.07.2025 with disposal within 3 months and no unnecessary adjournments; all IAs in the writ petition closed. ¶42

Mrs. Hemalatha @ Hemavathi Vs Mr. Kusumakar Shetty — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether the Family Court was justified in dismissing I.A.Nos. VI and VII seeking recall of PW.1 for further cross-examination in M.C.No.236/2021, and whether that order should be set aside.

¶24

Court's answer

Though on its face the impugned order contained no irregularity or illegality, in the interest of both parties and given that the entire M.C. proceedings stood stayed since 2022, this Court deemed it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and permit cross-examination of PW.1.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

Directions issued: parties to appear before the Family Court by 01.07.2025 without further notice; the Family Court to dispose of M.C.No.236/2021 within 3 months from 01.07.2025; no request for unnecessary adjournments to be considered and no further time to be granted.

¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Lalitha Kanneganti, J.), in a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 filed by the wife, set aside the order dated 17.09.2022 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangaluru dismissing I.A.Nos. VI and VII in M.C.No.236/2021 (husband's divorce petition on the ground of cruelty), which had refused recall of PW.1 for further cross-examination after an earlier recall of 24.06.2022 went unused despite two adjournments. Observing that the matrimonial proceedings had remained stayed since 2022, the Court allowed the interlocutory applications, permitted cross-examination of PW.1, directed the parties to appear by 01.07.2025 without further notice, and required the Family Court to dispose of the matter within three months without granting unnecessary adjournments.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:20591 WP No. 19902 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 19902 OF 2022 (GM-FC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MRS. HEMALATHA @ HEMAVATHI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, W/O KUSUMAKAR, R/AT DOOR NO.2-92, DEVI NILAYA, SHANTHI NAGARA, KAVOOR, MANGALURU – 575 015.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

MR. KUSUMAKAR SHETTY, S/O MUDDANNA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.5-4-214, DODDA HITHLU, M.M.ROAD, BALLALBAGH, MANGALURU – 575 003.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(SRI.KUSUMAKAR SHEETY – RESPONDENT SERVED)

¶18

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.9.2022 PASSED ON IA NO.VI AND I A NO.VII IN M.C.NO.236/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT D.K. MANGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:20591 WP No. 19902 of 2022

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Aggrieved by the order passed on I.A.Nos. VI and VII in M.C.No.236/2021 dated 17.09.2022 by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangaluru, the wife is before this Court. Husband has filed the M.C. 236/2021 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. In that, the present IAs. are filed to recall PW.1 for the further cross-examination which came to be dismissed by the Court observing that earlier also he has sought for such an application and the same was allowed on 24.06.2022 by imposing costs. It is the duty of the counsel for the respondent not only to pay the cost imposed but also proceed with the cross-examination of PW.1 on the next date of hearing. But in this case, after recall of PW.1 by order dated 24.06.2022, the counsel for the respondent failed to crossexamine PW.1 even after granting two adjournments and in those circumstances, the Court was of the view that such an application cannot be considered.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits the Court ought to have considered the fact that as on that day he was before the other Court. As such, he could not cross-examine PW.1 and sought for time and if the PW.1 is not

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:20591 WP No. 19902 of 2022

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

further cross-examined, it would cause lot of prejudice to the

¶30

wife and these aspects were not considered by the Court.

¶31

Though notice is served on the respondent, there is

¶32

no representation on behalf of the respondent.

¶33

This Court has perused order. On the face of it, it appears that there is no irregularity or illegality with the order passed by the Court. This matter is pending before the Court from the year 2022 and this Court had granted stay of all further proceedings and from the year 2022, the entire M.C. proceedings are stayed. For not granting an opportunity to recall in the year 2021, a matter of 2022 is pending before the Court till 2025 and stay of the Court proceedings were granted.

¶34

It is very unfortunate that the matrimonial proceedings are going on in this manner. In the interest of both the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the order impugned and allowed the petition to cross-examine PW.1. The parties shall appear before the Court by 25.06.2025 without further notice and the Court shall dispose of the matter within 3 months from 25.06.2025 and no request for unnecessary adjournments shall be considered by the Court. This M.C. is of the year 2021 the

¶35

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:20591 WP No. 19902 of 2022

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Family Court shall dispose of as expeditiously as possible and no further time will be granted. Accordingly, the this Court is passing the following:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

(i) The order dated 17.09.2022 passed on I.A.Nos. VI and VII in M.C.No.236/2021 dated 17.09.2022 by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangaluru, is hereby set-aside and consequently I.A.Nos.VI and VII are allowed .

¶41

(ii) The parties shall appear before the Family Court by 01.07.2025 without further notice and the Family Court shall dispose of the matter within 3 months from 01.07.2025 and no request for unnecessary adjournments shall be considered by the Court.

¶42

(iii) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed .

¶43

(iv) All IAs., in this petition shall stand closed.

¶44

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶45

KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 Ct: sn

Mrs. Hemalatha @ Hemavathi v. Mr. Kusumakar Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Hemalatha @ Hemavathi v. Mr. Kusumakar Shetty

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

S R Kamalamma Vs Suvarnamma

Sri. Suresha Vs Smt. Gayatri. H. M.

Mr. Vinod Kumar P Vs Mrs. Varalakshmi

Kumari Abha Sinha Vs Mr Deepak Kumar Sinha

Mr. Vishen Vinay Kumar Vs Smt. Deeshma G

Smt Lalitha Joshi @ Lalitha Pande Vs Dr Shripad Pande