- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49831-DB MFA No. 4561 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 4561 OF 2017 (FC) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. SHEELA B. C. @ MANGALA, W/O MR. NAGESH S., AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, No.754/4, DODDA PET CROSS, NEXT JAMMA MASJID, DAVANAGERE - 577 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. T. HAREESH BHANDARY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. NAGESH S., S/O MR. SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, No.158, G-3, BALAJI HOMS, 4TH STAGE, BEML LAYOUT, DOUBLE ROAD, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 098. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. A. LALITHA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49831-DB MFA No. 4561 of 2017 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.04.2017 PASSED IN M.C.No.2114/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 25.04.2017 passed in M.C. No.2114/2012 by the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bengaluru, whereby the appeal filed by the husband/respondent herein seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19551 has been allowed on the ground of desertion i.e. under Section 13(1)(ib) of the HM Act. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the objections and the testimony of the RW.1, who is the 1 HM Act - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49831-DB MFA No. 4561 of 2017 appellant herein to contend that the elements of desertion are not made out. However, perusal of paragraph 9 of the examination-in-chief of the appellant (RW.1) in the form of an affidavit, which was sworn on 10.02.2017 reflects the admission that she was staying with her parents at Davanagere since 19.06.2009. In view of the aforesaid, we find no error in the judgment and decree impugned. A finding has been categorically recorded by the Family Court after due consideration of evidence and as such, the appeal requires to be dismissed. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant states that his application Under Section 25 of the HM Act be considered. It is stated that I.A. was filed on 02.07.2024, which has not been put up, which was moved under Section 25 of the HM Act. Be that as it may. In view of the provision of Section 25 of the HM Act, the Family Court would have jurisdiction to adjudicate on any application that may be moved by the appellant seeking alimony. The High Court would be the appellate forum in case the appellant is not satisfied with the amount of alimony granted. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49831-DB MFA No. 4561 of 2017 5. In view of the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. Pending applications stand dismissed. It is, however, open to the appellant to move an appropriate application before the Family Court for alimony. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23