Ms. Leia Cariappa Vs the Commissioner of Public Instructions — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ms. Leia Cariappa Vs the Commissioner of Public Instructions — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Modification of line 14 of para-6 of the final order dated 13.01.2023 in W.P.No.19234/2022 (substituted sentence recorded in the order); review petition disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence in para-6 (line 14) of the final order dated 13.01.2023 in W.P.No.19234/2022 - stating that respondent No.6 violated and breached the Memorandum of Settlement, resulting in a contempt petition pending adjudication - constitutes an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review and modification/expunging.

Court's answer

The petitioner's submission is found sustainable and accepted: the contempt petition against respondent No.6 was dropped upon accepting his apology; accordingly, line 14 of para-6 of the order dated 13.01.2023 requires to be modified as it is an error apparent on the record/order.

Ratio / Principle

The Court recorded the modified wording of the sentence: 'But the fact remains that respondent no. 6 violated and breached the terms and conditions of the said Memorandum of Settlement as agreed between them, which resulted in filing of a contempt petition before the Contempt Court, which is pending adjudication.'

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

REVIEW PETITION (High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; Pradeep Singh Yerur J.; decided 10.03.2026): Filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 CPC by Ms. Leia Cariappa, a minor represented by her mother Smt. Shruthi Cauvery Iyer as next friend, seeking review of the final order dated 13.01.2023 in W.P.No.19234/2022 and expunging of the para-6 observation (words 'But the fact remains..' to '.. which is pending adjudication') to the effect that respondent No.6 (Sri Rajesh Cariappa, the child's father) violated and breached the Memorandum of Settlement, resulting in a contempt petition stated to be pending adjudication. Counsel for the petitioner submitted the contempt petition was dropped upon accepting respondent No.6's apology. The Court accepted the submission as sustainable, held that line 14 of para-6 'requires to be modified as it is an error apparent on the record/order', recorded the substituted wording of the sentence as printed, and disposed of the petition. Respondents: Commissioner of Public Instructions, Deputy Director of Public Instructions (Bengaluru North), Block Education Officer (Bengaluru North-4), Principals of Vidyashilp Academy and Bangalore International School, and Sri Rajesh Cariappa; notice to R5 dispensed (10.03.2026), notice to R6 held sufficient (02.09.2025).

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14356 RP No. 102 of 2023

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REVIEW PETITION NO. 102 OF 2023

BETWEEN:

MS. LEIA CARIAPPA D/O. RAJESH CARIAPPA AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS NO.21, 'B' TYPE 2^ND FLOOR SHEFALI APARTMENTS NO.26 AGA ABBAS ALI ROAD BENGALURU - 560 008 (SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER NEXT FRIEND / MOTHER SMT. SHRUTHI CAUVERY IYER W/O. GOVIND SHIVKUMAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS NO.21, 'B' BYPE 2^ND FLOOR SHEFALI APARTMENTS NO.26 AGA ABBAS ALI ROAD BENGALURU - 560 008.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI VIJAY A.M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS BENGALURU NORTH KEMPEGOWDA ROAD OPPOSITE CAUVERY BHAVAN BENGALURU - 560 002.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14356 RP No. 102 of 2023

HC-KAR

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER BENGALURU NORTH-4 YELAHANKA BENGALURU - 560 064.

THE PRINCIPAL VIDYASHILP ACADEMY SY.NO.1 AND 13 GOVINDAPURA BEHIND YELAHANKA AIRFORCE BASE BENGALURU - 560 064.

THE PRINCIPAL BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL GEDDALAHALLI HENNUR - BAGALUR ROAD KOTHANUR POST BENGALURU - 560 077.

SRI RAJESH CARIAPPA S/O. PEMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS NO.7/1, ZEN HOUSE LANGRORD ROAD RICHMOND TOWN BENGALURU - 560 025. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.S.GURUSWAMY, LEARNED AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI CHANDAN K. ADVOCATE FOR R4; VIDE ORDER DATED 10.03.2026 NOTICE TO R5 IS DISPENSED;

VIDE ORDER DATED 02.09.2025 NOTICE TO R6 IS HELD SUFFICIENT;)

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC PRAYING TO REVIEW THE FINAL ORDER DATED 13.01.2023 PASSED IN W.P.NO.19234/2022, THEREBY EXPUNGING THE OBSERVATION MADE IN SENTENCE COMMENCING FROM 14^TH LINE OF PARA-6 COMMENCING WITH THE WORDS "BUT THE FACT REMAINS.."

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14356 RP No. 102 of 2023

HC-KAR

UNTIL THE END OF THE SENTENCE ENDING WITH THE WORDS ".. WHICH IS PENDING ADJUDICATION".

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned

Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned counsel for respondent No.4.

This petition is filed seeking review of the order dated 13.01.2023 passed in W.P.No.19234/2022, thereby expunging the observation made in sentence commencing from 14^th line of para-6 commencing with the words "But the fact remains.." until the end of the sentence ending with the words ".. which is pending adjudication".

It is the submission of the learned counsel for

petitioner that there is a slight error apparent on the face of the order in the para-6, inasmuch as the violation and breach of the terms and conditions of the settlement are

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14356 RP No. 102 of 2023

HC-KAR

by respondent No.6, against whom a contempt petition

has been initiated by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for petitioner also submits that the contempt petition was dropped upon accepting the apology of respondent No.6, who is none other than the father of the minor child. Therefore, the submission of the learned counsel is found to be sustainable and the same is

accepted. Accordingly, line 14 of para-6 requires to be modified as it is an error apparent on the record/order.

"But the fact remains that respondent no. 6 violated and breached the terms and conditions of the said Memorandum of Settlement as agreed between them, which resulted in filing of a contempt petition before the Contempt Court, which is pending adjudication."

Accordingly, this petition is disposed off .

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

CPN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1