- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100832 OF 2024 (MC) BETWEEN: SMT. UMADEVI @ MARIYAMMA W/O. HULIGAYI ANJINAPPA D/O. PYALAR MALLAPPA AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KESHAVARAYANABANDI VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUK, NOW R/AT. UPANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, H.B. HALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-583212. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. RESHMA MADIWALAR, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. HULIGAYI ANJINAPPA S/O. KADLA BALAPPA, AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KESHAVARAYANABANDI VILLAGE, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-583212. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT-NOTICE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.28(1) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, PRAYING SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED.23.01.2024 AND DECREE DATED 30.01.2024 IN M.C.NO.01/2023 DATED LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI AND ETC., THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.03 10:41:25 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.) This is the appeal filed under Sec. 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying for setting aside the judgment and decree passed in MC No.1/2023 dated 23.01.2024 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hagaribomanahalli and for such other relief. 2. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the parties will be referred with their ranks, as they were before the Trial Court. 3. Petitioner has filed petition under Sec. 13(1)(ia)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 praying for grant of decree of divorce by dissolving his marriage with respondent that had taken place on 02.05.2013 at Keshavarayanabandi village, H.B. Halli Taluk in presence of elders, family members and friends. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 4. The case of the petitioner before the trial Court in a nutshell is that the marriage of petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 02.05.2013 at Keshavarayanabandi village, H.B. Halli Taluk as per the Hindu customary rites and rituals. After the marriage, the petitioner and respondent led married life for 3 years and they are not having any issues. Petitioner is an agriculturalist living in undivided joint family. Respondent was not adjusted with petitioner and his family members, used to pick up quarrels with petitioner and his family members unnecessarily, she instigated the petitioner to take share from joint family properties and to stay in her parental house, which was not agreed by him. The respondent was always visiting her parental house without his knowledge and consent. Several conciliations and panchayats convened in presence of elders and in those panchayats, respondent agreed to lead marital life with petitioner and lived with him only for 3 months. Again, she has continued her earlier behaviour. On 11.12.2021, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 respondent went to her parental house at the instance of her parents without informing petitioner and his family members. In subsequent panchayath, she refused to live with petitioner. Since 2 years, respondent is residing in her parental house without any cause. Thus, there is no chance of continuance of marital relationship. Hence, petitioner has filed the petition for decree of divorce by dissolving his marriage dated 02.05.2013. 5. After service of notice, respondent has appeared through her counsel. But not contested the petition by filing her objection statement or cross examining the petitioner. Based on the affidavit evidence of petitioner, the learned trial Judge has decreed the petition and granted the decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under Sec. 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 but has dismissed the petition on the other ground, i.e.13(1)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 6. Aggrieved by said judgment and decree, the appellant has preferred the present appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 7. Heard arguments of learned counsel for appellant. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant being a rustic woman was not advised properly by her advocate and not contested the petition. She is still interested to live with her husband. Hence, at least prayed for remand of the matter. 9. Even after service of notice, respondent remained absent in this appeal. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of the appeal papers, the following points would arise for our consideration in this appeal: i) Whether the appellant proves that the decree of divorce granted by learned trial Judge is erroneous and it requires interference? ii) Whether the remand of the matter to trial Court is required? 11. Our answer to point Nos.(i) and (ii) are in “Affirmative” for the following reasons: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 12. Point Nos.1 and 2- These points are considered together as they require common discussion. 13. The admitted facts of the case are that the petitioner and respondent are husband and wife and their marriage was solemnized on 02.05.2013 as per the customs prevailing amongst Hindus at Keshavarayanabandi village, H.B. Halli Taluk. 14. After the marriage, according to petitioner, both resided together for a period of 3 years. Petitioner has made bald allegation of inflicting of cruelty by respondent in the petition, i.e., she forced him to take his share in the joint family and to go and reside in her parental house, which he refused; she often visiting her parental house without his knowledge and consent; even after convening several panchayats and advised to respondent by elders, she has not heeded for the advice and she continued her attitude; she had been to her parental house on 11.12.2021 and has not returned back, etc. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 15. On perusal of trial court records, we noticed that after appearance of parties, on 12.04.2023, matter was referred to Mediation and it was not settled; then, on 07.06.2023, it was posted to petitioner’s evidence without providing opportunity to respondent to file her objection statement and to contest the petition; then, on 06.07.2023, referred to Lok Adalat wherein the matter was not settled; on 04.01.2024, immediately after filing the affidavit evidence and marking documents on behalf of petitioner and cross-examination of petitioner, evidence of respondent was taken as nil and judgment was pronounced on 23.01.2024 by granting decree of divorce. The trial court except considering the self-serving testimony of the petitioner has not considered any other evidence and erroneously come to the conclusion that respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty without any corroboration of oral and documentary evidence. 16. The above proceedings of trial court reveal that no opportunity was given to respondent to contest the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 petition and trial court erroneously granted the decree of divorce casually. Dissolution of marriage would lead to severe consequences. Therefore, a proper opportunity requires to be afforded to the parties before passing the judgment of dissolution of marriage. Even after service of notice of this appeal, respondent in this appeal has not appeared and not contested the petition. 17. Considering all the above facts, we are of the considered opinion that decree of divorce of trial court is to be set aside and the matter is to be remitted back to the trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. Accordingly, point Nos.1 and 2 are answered in affirmative. 18. Point No.3 - In view of findings on point Nos.1 and 2, we proceed to pass the following order:- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14360-DB MFA No. 100832 of 2024 ORDER i) Appeal filed under Sec. 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is partly allowed. ii) The judgment and decree in MC No.1/2023 dated 23.01.2024 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hagaribomanahalli is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Family Court for fresh consideration. iii) The trial Court shall provide opportunity to both the appellant and the respondent i.e., the wife and husband to lead evidence and to cross-examine each other. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE VMB, CT:CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 55