- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT NO.100147 OF 2015 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102748 OF 2015 IN REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT NO.100147 OF 2015: BETWEEN: SMT. HEMALATA W/O MOHAN PATIL, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O.101, 5TH MAIN, NEAR CHENNAMMA KERE ACHCHUKATTU IIIRD STAGE, BANASHANKARI LAYOUT, BANGALORE. - PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR AND SMT. KAVYA C. SHETTAR, ADVOCATES) AND: SRI. MOHAN S/O SHRISHAIL PATIL, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O.NEAR GADDANAKERE CROSS, BAGALKOT, NOW AT CAPGEMINI INDIA PVT. LTD., OPP. ITPL, CRESCENT-2 PRESTIGE, SHANTINIKETAN, SADARAMANGALA VILLAGE, WHITE FIELD MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUKA, BANGALORE -560 048. - RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHRIKANT T. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 12.08.2015 IN CRI. MISC NO.31/2014 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD & ETC., Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102748 OF 2015: BETWEEN: SMT. HEMALATA W/O MOHAN PATIL, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O.101, 5TH MAIN, CHENNAMMA KERE ACHCHUKATTU, BANASHANKARI, IIIRD STAGE, BANGALORE. - APPELLANT (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR AND SMT. KAVYA C. SHETTAR, ADVOCATES) AND: SRI. MOHAN S/O SHRISHAIL PATIL, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O NO.101, 5TH MAIN NEAR CHANNAMMA KERE, IIIRD STAGE, BANSHANKARI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-85. - RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHRIKANT T. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 19(1) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD IN M.C.NO.19/2013 DATED 12.08.2015 & ETC. THE REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT AND THE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) The appeal and the revision petition under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 are as against the common order dated 12.08.2015 in M.C. No. 19/2013 and Cri. Misc No. 31/2014 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dharwad, [for short, ‘the Family Court’]. The Family Court has allowed the respondent’s petition in M.C. No. 19/2013 under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act [for short, ‘the H.M. Act’] dissolving the marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent on 30.07.2007. The Family Court has also allowed the appellant’s petition in Cri. Misc No. 31/2014 under Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code [Cr.P.C.] directing the respondent to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.25,000/- upto two years from the date of order observing that the appellant must search and find a suitable job for her. 2. This Court on 22.11.2017 has directed the respondent to continue to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000/- until the disposal of this appeal and the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 revision petition. This interim order has continued to be in force, but the petition and the appeal are dismissed on 23.01.2025 for default by this Court because of the appellant’s continued absence. On 18.02.2025, this Court, on perusal of the records with the appellant filing application for recalling this Court’s order dated 23.01.2025, has directed both the appellant and the respondent to be present. 3. This Court must next observe that a repeated number of efforts were made by this Court for conciliation between the appellant and the respondent, but generally to no avail. However, this Court has once again interacted with both the appellant and the respondent with the help of the good offices of Smt. Kavya C. Shettar and Sri Srikant T. Patil, the learned counsels respectively for the appellant and the respondent. The appellant and respondent have filed a joint memo which reads as under: “That the parties have now agreed to resolve the lis amicably. As per the terms agreed, the parties consent for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The allegations made in this - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 proceeding as well as the other pending cases between the parties and their family members are agreed to be withdrawn. That the only dispute now needs to be adjudicated is with regard to payment of permanent alimony. Respondent has now agreed to pay Rs.25,00,000/- in addition to arrears as on this day. Appellant is now demanding Rs.35,00,000/- along with the arrears as on this day. Therefore, the said issue is to be adjudicated in this appeal.” 4. This Court must record satisfaction that both the appellant and the respondent are seeking dissolution of marriage of their own free will and consent withdrawing all allegations against each other and the respective family members and that the appellant and the respondents have also agreed on the amount that is payable by the respondent to the appellant as permanent alimony but for a marginal difference. This Court must also record that the respondent acknowledges that a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- is payable as arrears up to date in terms of this Court’s interim order. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 5. The respondent has agreed to pay Rs.25 lakhs but with Sri Srikant T. Patil stating that the respondent will pay first Rs.15 lakhs within four [4] weeks from today and he must be granted some reasonable time to pay the remaining amount with arrears. The respondent is seeking, as against the offer of Rs.25 lakhs, a sum of Rs.35 lakhs toning down the claim for a much higher side. The appellant and the respondent are Engineering Graduates, and they have no children. Crucially, they have been living separately for a period of almost 12 years now. As stated above, they have come to terms except on the permanent alimony. Smt. Kavya Shettar and Sri Srikant Patil present the aforesaid as justify their respective stand on whether Rs.25 lakhs or Rs.35 lakhs will be a just and reasonable permanent alimony for the respondent. 6. This Court is of the view that an elaborate discussion on the difference of Rs.10 lakhs will not be justified, and that the entire focus, with the parties seeking dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, must be to examine this limited controversy on that scale which is just. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 On a conspectus reading of the entire circumstances based on the records and the interaction, and the requirements of Section 13 B of the HM Act, this Court is of the considered opinion that the joint memo must be accepted allowing the appeal modifying the Family Court’s on dissolution of the marriage solemnized on 30.04.2007 between the appellant and the respondent but on the following terms. Hence, the following order observing that in the circumstances in which the marriage is dissolved and the decision on permanent alimony is arrived at, it would be incumbent upon the appellant to pay the amount as is now ordered lest he is called upon to answer contempt of disobedience. ORDER The appeal in MFA is allowed and the marriage between the appellant and the respondent solemnized on 30.04.2007 is dissolved by mutual consent on the following terms> [a] The appellant and the respondent withdraw every allegation against each other and also their family members. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 [b] The appellant and the respondent will withdraw all pending proceedings and for that purpose both of them shall be entitled to file a certified copy of this order with the concerned court and these courts must bring about a closure to the pending proceedings. [c] The respondent is called upon to pay a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs as permanent alimony along with admitted arrears of maintenance in a sum of Rs.3,10,000/-. [i] Rs. 15 lakhs by 25.03.2025 through a Demand Draft drawn in favour of the appellant. [ii] Rs. 15 lakhs by 25.04.2025 through a Demand Draft drawn in favour of the appellant. [iii] Rs. 10 lakhs by 25.09.2025 through a Demand Draft - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3787-DB RPFC No. 100147 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102748 of 2015 drawn in favour of the appellant. [iv] The final amount of Rs. 5 lakhs by 24.12.2025 through a Demand Draft drawn in favour of the appellant. The revision petition stands disposed, and the Office is called upon to draw a decree accordingly. Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE BVV, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 24