- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35742 WP No. 27338 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 27338 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: B GANESH KISHAN S/O LATE B.M.KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO 12, NEW KORCHA PALYA 5TH CROSS, SHIVAJINAGARA BENGALURU. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARUN C BHAT., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. PADMASHREE G @ PADMA G D/O LATE GOPALAKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NO 29 A, 2ND STREET OLD CEMETERY ROAD TASKER TOWN, SHIVAJINAGARA BENGALURU - 51. …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 FO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21/07/2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU IN EX.C. NO. 317/2018 AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35742 WP No. 27338 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in Ex.C.No.317/2018 dated 21.07.2025 by the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had dismissed I.A.No.4 filed by the JDr with costs of Rs.5,000/- and observed that if the balance and the cost imposed remains unpaid, the Court will take coercive steps against the JDr and the matter was directed to be listed on 30.07.2025. 2. The execution case was filed by the DHr seeking execution of orders on I.A.No.5 in M.C.No.473/2008 dated 02.04.2018, whereby the JDr was directed to bear the entire education expenses of the minor child till the child attains majority. The execution petition is filed in the year 2018 and the Judgment Debtor has entered appearance in the year 2019. Thereafter, several times warrants were issued and finally he has appeared before the Family Court on 20.01.2024. Thereafter, he started making partial payments and paid total amount of Rs.37,000/-. Then on 22.03.2025, the JDr has come up with I.A.No.4 under Order XIX Rule 2 of CPC seeking - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35742 WP No. 27338 of 2025 permission to cross examine the DHr on the facts narrated in her affidavit dated 15.12.2018 in support of her EP claim of Rs.1,00,931/-. 3. The Family Court by order impugned had dismissed the application. While dismissing the application, the Family Court had categorically observed that the order sheet reveals that the cause notice sent to the JDr by Court and RPAD returned unserved. In response to the hand notice, the JDr put his appearance on 22.03.2019 and prayed time. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to engage counsel by 22.03.2019, but he did not turn up. Therefore, arrest notice was issued vide order dated 06.08.2019 and reissued from time to time till 10.04.2023 to both his alternative addresses but returned unserved. On 10.04.2023, instead of arrest notice due to oversight, it was ordered to reissue arrest warrant and the same was continued and arrest warrants were reissued from time to time till 20.01.2024 and on that date, the JDr appeared through his counsel i.e., when the arrest warrant were reissued through the Police Commissioner, but not paid any amount. Again, the arrest warrant was reissued. Then on the next date - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35742 WP No. 27338 of 2025 onwards he started making partial payments from 07.01.2024 to 22.03.2025 and paid total amount of Rs.37,000/-. On 22.03.2025, the JDr has come up with the present application. The Family Court had observed that there is force in the objection of the DHr that only with an intention to prolong the proceedings and to avoid the payment, the JDr has come up with the application. The Family Court had observed when and how the amounts are paid and what are the delaying tactics on the side of the JDr and also observed that the DHr is entitled for 12% interest per annum, but unfortunately the hands of the Court being an executing Court cannot go beyond the decree, are tied as there is no order for interest in the order under execution. The Family Court had come to the conclusion that since the matter is of the year 2018 and in the list of 50 old cases on the file of the Court, wherein there is directions by the Administrative Judge to dispose of those matters by the end of September 2025, it is made clear that if the JDr remains unpaid the balance and the cost now imposed, the Court would have no other alternative than to take coercive steps against the JDr. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35742 WP No. 27338 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/JDr submits that the notice and the arrest warrants were not served on the JDr as the address that is furnished by the decree holder is not the correct address. It is submitted that as the documents were not given to him, he wants an opportunity to cross-examine the decree holder on some of these documents. The Family Court without considering all these aspects had dismissed the application. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/ JDr, perused the entire material on record. It is a very unfortunate case where an order that is passed in M.C.No.473/2008 dated 02.04.2018 is now for execution before the Court. Execution case is filed in the year 2018. When the JDr was served notice in the year 2019, for various reasons, he had kept quiet conveniently from the year 2019 to 2024. Even when he appeared before the Court on 20.01.2024, whatever the stand that he has taken, he had not filed any I.A. at that time. He kept quiet for another one and a half years from the date of his second appearance before the Court. The Family Court had rightly dealt with the conduct of the party and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35742 WP No. 27338 of 2025 decided I.A.No.4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Courts shall not come to the rescue of a litigant who is only trying to abuse the process of law without a valid reason. Hence, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16