- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4876 RPFC No. 100147 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100147 OF 2023 (-) BETWEEN: MRS. LEELA W/O. NIJAGUNNEPPA SHIVABASANNAVAR, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. AT POST BYAHATTI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580023. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. KAVITA S. JADHAV, ADVOCATE) AND: MR. NIJAGUNEPPA S/O. NAGAPPA SHIVABASANNAVAR, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE EMPLOYEE IN RAILWAY, R/O. AT POST BYAHATTI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580023. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. NANDINI B. SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.04.2023 IN CRIM.MISC.185/2019 PASSED BY THE PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT HUBBALLI AND ALLOW THE PETITION IN CRIM. MISC.185/2019 AS PRAYED FOR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4876 RPFC No. 100147 of 2023 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner-wife challenging the order dated 11.04.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.185/2019 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi (for short “the Family Court”) dismissing the petition. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioner-wife that the marriage between petitioner-wife and the respondent-husband was solemnized on 15.04.2009 and same was registered on 27.08.2009. It is the case of the petitioner-wife that she is a divorcee and having two children from her first marriage. It is also stated in the petition that the petitioner-wife has lead marital life with respondent-husband for a period of 8 years and no issues are born in their wedlock. It is also stated in the petition that the respondent-husband used to torture the petitioner-wife physically and mentally and also not taking care of the needs of the petitioner-wife and therefore, the petitioner- wife has filed Crl.Misc.No.185/2019 seeking maintenance from the respondent-husband. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4876 RPFC No. 100147 of 2023 3.1. After service of notice, the respondent-husband entered appearance and filed statement of objections admitting the relationship with the petitioner-wife. The respondent- husband has filed M.C.No.183/2019 seeking restitution of conjugal rights and accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition. 3.2. The Family Court, after considering the material on record, by its order dated 11.04.2023 dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner-wife herself has left the matrimonial home. Hence, this petition is filed by the petitioner. 4. I have heard Smt. Kavitha S Jadhav, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-wife and Smt. Nandini B Somapur, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- husband. 5. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-wife that the Family Court has committed an error in dismissing the petition despite the fact that the petitioner-wife has raised a plea that the respondent-husband was physically and mentally harassing the petitioner-wife and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4876 RPFC No. 100147 of 2023 therefore, the reasons assigned by the Family Court requires to be interfered with in this petition. 6. Per contra, Smt. Nandini B Somapur, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Family Court and further contended that the respondent-husband has filed M.C.No.181/2024 seeking dissolution of marriage and the said petition is pending consideration before the competent Family Court and accordingly, sought to justify the impugned order passed by the Family Court. 7. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the marriage between the petitioner-wife with the respondent was solemnized on 15.04.2009. It is also admitted by the petitioner herein that she was a divorcee having two children from her first marriage. On careful examination of the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the Family Court has dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner-wife is living separately from the respondent-husband without cause. The said reason assigned by the Family Court cannot be - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4876 RPFC No. 100147 of 2023 accepted on the sole ground that the petitioner-wife in the pleadings itself has stated that she was subjected to physical and mental harassment by the respondent-husband. In that view of the matter, it is the duty of the Family Court to consider the plea of the parties in entirety and to pass an order on merits. Accordingly, it is a fit case to remand the matter to the Family Court for fresh consideration in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha and another1 and in the case of Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena and others2. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The order dated 11.04.2023 in Crl.Misc.No.185/2019 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hubballi is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Family Court for fresh consideration. 1 (2021) 2 SCC 324 2 (2015) 6 SCC 353 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4876 RPFC No. 100147 of 2023 iii) In order to avoid further delay in the matter, since the parties are represented through their counsel, the parties are directed to appear before the Family Court on 21.04.2025 at 11.00 a.m. iv) It is open for the parties to lead evidence, if any, in the matter. v) In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE YAN CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 14