Allowed¶38

Smt. Shruthi P v. Sri Kushal Kumar M G @ Putta

Karnataka HC5 Jun 2026CP/91/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of divorce case under Section 24 CPC; wife's convenience; 102 km distance Bangalore-Mandya; M.C.No.211/2025 Mandya to Principal Family Court Bangalore; respondent served and unrepresented, ex parte; related proceedings Crime No.80/2025 Women Police Station Mandya and Crl.Mis.No.60/2026 maintenance; High Court of Karnataka; P Sree Sudha, J.; CP No. 91 of 2026; decided 05.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of M.C.No.211/2025 from the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mandya to the Principal Family Court, Bangalore; IA closed in view of disposal of the main petition. ¶38

Smt. Shruthi P Vs Sri Kushal Kumar M G @ Putta — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:26758 CP No. 91 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶8

CIVIL PETITION NO. 91 OF 2026

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. SHRUTHI P D/O PURUSHOTHAM W/O KUSHALKUMAR.M.G @ PUTTA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT, NO. 124, IIIRD CROSS, PRAGATHIPURA, BANASHANKARI II STAGE, BANGALURU - 560 070.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. PARAMESHWARAPPA M.V, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI

¶15

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

SRI. KUSHAL KUMAR M.G @ PUTTA S/O M.GOVINDACHAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.21ST CROSS, V.V. NAGARA, KALLAHALLI, MANDYA - 571 401.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶19

THIS CP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO WITH DRAW THE CASE MC NO.211/2025 PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, AT MANDYA AND TRANSFER THE SAME FOR TRIAL AND DISPOSAL OF THE PRINCIPAL FAMILY COURT NYAYADEGULA AT BENGALURU.

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:26758 CP No. 91 of 2026

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner is present.

¶27

Inspite of service of notice to the respondent, counsel for the respondent or respondent has not turned up and set ex - parte.

¶28

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

¶29

petitioner.

¶30

This petition is filed by petitioner-wife for transfer of M.C. No.211/2025 filed by husband for divorce before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM., at Mandya to the Principal Family Court, Bangalore.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is residing along with her parents in Bengaluru. Her marriage with the respondent was performed on 18.05.2020 and they are not blessed with any children. She gave complaint against her husband and his parents on 08.12.2025 in Crime No.80/2025 before the Women

¶32

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:26758 CP No. 91 of 2026

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

Police Station, Mandya. She also filed Crl.Mis.No.60/2026 for maintenance before the Principal Family Court, Bangalore. She stated that the distance between Bangalore and Mandya is 102 kilometers and it is inconvenient for her to travel all the way.

¶36

Considering the reasons stated by the learned counsel for petitioner, as there is no representation by the respondent's counsel, this Court finds it just and reasonable to transfer M.C.No.211/2025 from the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Mandya to the Principal Family Court, Bangalore.

¶37

Ordered accordingly.

¶38

In the result, the petition is allowed.

¶39

IA is closed in view of disposal of the main petition.

¶40

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶41

PSJ

¶42

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12

Smt. Shruthi P v. Sri Kushal Kumar M G @ Putta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shruthi P v. Sri Kushal Kumar M G @ Putta

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

Smt Sushmitha a R Vs Sri Ashoka P C

M/S. Icici Lombard General Insurance Vs Sri Mudde Gowda

Muddegowda Vs B G Lokesh

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Shri Ningamaraiah

Smt. Pavitra Vs Sri. Sunil Kumar.B.D

Sri. Ningamaraiah Vs Sri. Srikantaiah