Dismissed¶¶36

Smt. Manavi Kp v. Kiran Kumar R

Karnataka HC12 Jun 2026CP/236/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer petition under Section 24 CPC dismissed; M.C.No.5158/2024 restitution of conjugal rights retained at II Additional Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru; distance Bangalore–Sringeri 320 Kms; wife graduate, capable of travelling; examination via videoconferencing or Commissioner permitted; respondent to bear travel expenses if wife attends in person; related maintenance case Crl.Mis.No.24/2024 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. with interim maintenance granted; coram P Sree Sudha, J.; decision dated 12 June 2026; High Court of Karnataka.

What did the court decide?

The transfer petition is dismissed; M.C.No.5158/2024 remains on the file of the II Additional Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. ¶¶36

Smt. Manavi Kp Vs Kiran Kumar R — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:28608 CP No. 236 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶7

CIVIL PETITION NO. 236 OF 2025

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. MANAVI KP WIFE OF KIRAN KUMAR DAUGHTER OF PRABHAKAR KR AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS' HOTEL NISARGA GRAND, THANIKONDU CHECK POST, KEREKATTE, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK SRINGERI 5771 139.

¶10

PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. ABHINAY YT.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed KIRAN KUMAR R by PADMASHREE SON OF LATE H RAMAKRISHNA, SHEKHAR DESAI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS Location: High AND RESIDING AT NO. 203, 7TH B MAIN ROAD, Court of Karnataka NEAR ON SHAKTHI TEMPLE, HRBR LAYOUT, I BLOCK, KALYANANAGAR BENGALURU NORTH, 560 0 43.

¶14

RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. PRADEEP NAIK K.,ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS CP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO TRANSFER M.C.NO.5158/2024 PENDING ON THE

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:28608 CP No. 236 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU TO THE CIVIL JUDGE, NARASIMHA RAJA PURA, SITTING AT SRINGERI, FOR DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC,.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for

¶25

the respondent are present.

¶26

Though this matter has come up for admission, it is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.

¶27

This transfer petition is filed by wife for transfer of M.C.No.5158/2024 filed by husband for restitution of conjugal rights before the learned II Additional Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru to the Court of Civil Judge, Narasimha Raja Pura, sitting at Sringeri.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has completed her graduation in BA and residing with her parents. Her marriage with respondent was performed on

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28608 CP No. 236 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

26.01.2023. After the marriage both of them resided in Bangalore for one year. Presently she is staying with her parents in Thanikodu Village which is at a distance of 12 Kms from Sringeri, the distance between Bangalore and Sringeri is 320 Kms. The petitioner stated that she is unemployed and dependent on her parents. The Petitioner further stated that there was a serious threat to her life and if she has to attend the Court in Bangalore. The petitioner has filed Crl.Mis.No.24/2024 for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., and an interim maintenance was granted.

¶32

Learned counsel for the respondent stated that respondent is working in Bajaj company in Bangalore and he could not get leaves. Moreover, the brother of petitioner is running a hotel in Yeshvanthpura, Bangalore. As such she can stay with her brother whenever she attends the Court at Bangalore. It is further stated that, he is paying the maintenance as per the order of the Court regularly. Admittedly the application was filed for restitution of conjugal rights by the husband at Bangalore where he is working. Both the petitioner and respondent resided in Bangalore for one year and she is a graduate, it cannot be said that she cannot travel alone. No

¶33

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28608 CP No. 236 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

doubt the distance between both the places is 320 Kms. The petitioner is at liberty to file her chief affidavit and she can be examined either through videoconferencing or through the Commissioner or else if she attends the Court by incurring the travel expenses the respondent is at liberty to pay the travel expenses to the petitioner.

¶36

With these observations the petition is dismissed .

¶37

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶38

PNV

¶39

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Smt. Manavi Kp v. Kiran Kumar R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manavi Kp v. Kiran Kumar R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Bharathamma B K Vs Sri Chowdappa

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Arshad @ Harshad

The Legal Manager Vs C Praveen

The Manager Vs Smt Shobha

Legal Manager Vs Smt Beronika Tapnar

Smt Shobha Vs Sri T a Ramachandra