Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26247 (KAR)

MR. VALERIAN DSOUZA v. MRS. SARITHA DSOUZA

RPFC/123/2024 · 2025-07-08

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24832 RPFC No. 123 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 123 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MR. VALERIAN DSOUZA, S/O. IGNATIUS DSOUZA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT. KODI HOUSE, VAKADI, MANJESHWARA, KASARGOD DISTRICT, KERALA-671 323. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ADLENE STEPHANIE MENDES, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. SARITHA DSOUZA, W/O. MR. VALERIAN DSOUZA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, 2. MISS STEPHY SHANAYA DSOUZA, D/O. VALERIAN DSOUZA, AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, (SINCE MINOR, REPRESENTED BY FIRST RESPONDENT MRS. SARITHA DSOUZA). 3. MASTER SLADEN DSOUZA, S/O. VALERIAN DSOUZA, AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS, (SINCE MINOR, REPRESENTED BY FIRST RESPONDENT MRS. SARITHA DSOUZA) ALL THREE ARE RESIDING AT DOOR NO.10-53, SASIHITHLU HOUSE, ULLALA ULIYA, ULIYA POST, MANGALURU-574146. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24832 RPFC No. 123 of 2024 (BY SRI. ARUNA BANGERA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND 3; MINORS REP BY R1) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.03.2024 PASSED IN CRL. MISC NO.22/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, D.K.MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER When this matter came up on 20.06.2025, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has not deposited the maintenance amount till date and there was no representation on petitioner’s side on that day. Hence, this matter was directed to be listed on 03.07.2025. On 03.07.2025 also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, this matter was directed to be listed for today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. 2. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the matter. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24832 RPFC No. 123 of 2024 3. Accordingly, the RPFC is dismissed for non- prosecution. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2