Disposed

Sri Kushal Patil v. Smt. Apeksha Ashok

Karnataka HC6 Feb 2026WP/38197/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an ex-parte protection order and RV application disposal order passed by Family Court in matrimonial dispute. Court noted no issue regarding contact with minor children in the challenged order. Writ petition dismissed but directed Family Court to dispose of pending applications on merits within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directing Family Court to dispose of Interim Applications II to IV on merits within one month.

Sri Kushal Patil Vs Smt. Apeksha Ashok — Matrimonial and Divorce | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:7018 WP No. 38197 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO. 38197 OF 2025 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

SRI. KUSHAL PATIL

S/O. RAJU. V. PATIL

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

R/AT NO.14, KUSHAL NIVAS,

¶12

CHANNAPPA LAYOUT, 2ND CROSS,

¶13

SHIMOGA - 577 201.

¶14

AND NOW PRESENTLY RESIDING AT,

¶15

Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

NO. 601, VARSHA APARTMENT,

¶17

SADASHIVNAGAR, ARMANE NAGAR,

¶18

BENGALURU - 560 080.

¶19

…PETITIONER

¶20

(BY SRI. NATARAJA, ADVOCATE)

¶21

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:7018 WP No. 38197 of 2025

HC-KAR

AND:

SMT. APEKSHA ASHOK

W/O. KUSHAL PATIL,

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2, THOGRIHANKAL HOUSE,

¶27

DR. PAI'S COMPOUND,

¶28

CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.

¶29

…RESPONDENT

¶30

(BY SMT. NITYA KALYANI P, ADVOCATE)

¶31

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.11.2025 ORDERS ON IANO.II TO IV IN M.C.189/2025, PASSED BY THE PRINCIPLE JUDGE FAMILY COURT, CHIKKAMAGALURU AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.,

¶32

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

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶34

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:7018 WP No. 38197 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

Heard Sri. Nataraja learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. Nithya Kalyani.P learned counsel for the respondent.

¶39

Being aggrieved by the order rendered by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Chikkamagaluru on I.A Nos. II to IV in M.C. No.189/2025 dated 03.11.2025, this writ petition is filed.

¶40

The operative portion of the impugned order is as follows:-

¶41

"The respondent, his relatives, agents, representatives or henchmen are hereby restrained from entering the residence and disturbing the petitioner in her residence at Chikkamagaluru.

¶42

The respondent his relatives, agents, representatives or henchmen are hereby restrained from threatening, intimidating or communicating the petitioner through any media, phone calls, messages, pending disposal of the petition till next date of hearing.

¶43

Issue notice of ex-parte order on I.A No.II and III along with emergent notice on I.A No.IV and notice on petition to the respondent".

¶44

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:7018 WP No. 38197 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is the father of 2 minor children, daughter Aarha K. Patil and the son named Arshiv.K.Patil. Through the impugned order, Family Court restrained the petitioner from communicating and conversing with his children through phone calls and messages. Learned counsel submits that such an order ought not to have been passed by the Family Court.

¶47

On the other hand learned counsel for respondent submits that as the petitioner and his men were threatening the respondent/wife, she sought protection and therefore such an order is passed.

¶48

The impugned order restrained the petitioner, his relatives and his men from entering the residence of the respondent. He and his men were also restrained from threatening, intimidating or communicating the petitioner through any form.

¶49

No order is passed restraining the petitioner from communicating with the children. Therefore this Court does not find any grounds whatsoever to quash the impugned order.

¶50

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:7018 WP No. 38197 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

However as an ex-parte order was passed, this Court considers desirable to dispose of the writ petition directing the Family Court to hear both parties and to dispose of I.A Nos. II to IV on merits time bound.

¶53

Thus the writ petition is disposed of with the following:-

¶54

ORDER

¶55

i. The Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Chikkamagaluru is directed to dispose of I.A Nos. II to IV in M.C No.189/2025 on merits within a period of 1 month from the date of receipt of copy of this order

¶56

ii. Registry is directed to forward the copy of this order to the Family Court, Chikkamagaluru forthwith.

¶57

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶58

¶59

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Sri Kushal Patil v. Smt. Apeksha Ashok

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Kushal Patil v. Smt. Apeksha Ashok

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Lakshmi Nagarajaiah Vs Sri L Nagarajaiah

Sri G Prakash Vs Smt Venila @ Veda

Shri. Manjunatha. H Vs Smt. Shruthi. K

Mr. Yogesh Kumar Tripathi Vs Mrs. Anindita Mathur

Mr. Sathish Shetty Vs Mrs. Sheebha Shetty

Madhu Vs Pallavi