Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26260 (KAR)

SUNIL KUMAR N v. SHILPA D V

RPFC/165/2020 · 2025-01-30

Pradeep Singh Yerur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4826 RPFC No. 165 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 165 OF 2020 BETWEEN: SUNIL KUMAR N S/O K S NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT 'A' 19TH CROSS 22ND MAIN ROAD SHAMANNA GARDEN SARAKKI KERE GOPALASWAMY LAYOUT J P NAGAR 5TH PHASE BENGALURU - 560 078 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.GURURAJA S SANGUR.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHILPA D V W/O SUNIL KUMAR N AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO 7 WARD NO 6, DIBBUR DIBBUR POST, TUMKUR CITY - 572 101 2. TANMAYEE D/O SUNIL KUMAR N AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS MINOR REP BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER SHILPA D V R/O AT NO 7 WARD NO 6 DIBBUR DIBBUR POST TUMKUR CITY - 572 101 …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4826 RPFC No. 165 of 2020 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.08.2020 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.No.47/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, TUMAKURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF Cr.P.C. FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER There is no representation on behalf of petitioner when the matter is called out in the post-lunch session. 2. The present matter is of the year 2020. On perusal of the order sheet, it is seen that when the mater came up before the Court on 15th March 2021 and 25th September 2024, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. On 20th December 2024, two weeks' time was granted to take steps, failing which directed to list the matter for dismissal. Hence, the matter is listed today. 3. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner and no steps are taken. Despite providing several opportunities, the petitioner has not availed the same. It - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4826 RPFC No. 165 of 2020 appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. In view of the above, the present RPFC is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60