Dismissed¶34

Sri Shivamurthy K P v. Smt Manasa

Karnataka HC22 Apr 2026RPFC/104/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (K. Manmadha Rao, J.), order dated 22.04.2026 in RPFC No. 104 of 2026: RPFC under S.438 BNSS against interim-maintenance order u/Sec.125 Cr.P.C. (Crl. Misc.No.101/2025, II Addl. CJJM Bengaluru Rural) dismissed as withdrawn after maintainability objection under S.19(4) Family Courts Act; liberty granted to file fresh Criminal Revision Petition. No merits decided; no precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh Criminal Revision Petition ¶34

Sri Shivamurthy K P Vs Smt Manasa — Maintenance and Alimony | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:22099 RPFC No. 104 of 2026

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO.104 OF 2026

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. SHIVAMURTHY K P, AGED ABOUT 56 YRS, S/O LATE K B PATELAPPA R/AT KESTURU VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI D B PURA BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT- 561 203.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. P.V. KALPANA, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SMT. MANASA W/O SHIVAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 37 YRS

¶14

Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

KUM.DIVYA, D/O SHIVAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,

¶16

BOTH RESPONDENTS ARE R/AT CHALLAHALLI VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI YELAHANKA TALUK BANGALORE-561 203.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF BNSS, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.11.2025 PASSED IN CRL. MISC.NO.101/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:22099 RPFC No. 104 of 2026

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner is present.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the office has raised objection regarding the maintainability of petition in view of Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act. In view of the same, the petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to convert this Revision Petition Family Court to Criminal Revision Petition.

¶27