- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 23938 OF 2024 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: MASTER LENNEIL D’LIMA S/O OSWALD HERMAN D’LIMA, AGED ABOUT 11 YERAS, SINCE MINOR REP. BY HIS MOTHER SMT.PRIYANKA D’SOUZA, W/O OSWALD HERMAN D’LIMA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, PRESENT RESIDING AT 3-34/(17) FATHIMA HILLS, PANCHANDY, BONDEL POST, MANGALORE-575 008 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJARAMA S., ADVOCATE) AND: MR. OSWALD HERMAN D’LIMA S/O SIMON D’LIMAR, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. RESIDING AT NO. 106 BUILDING NO. 03, DUNES VILLAGE, DUBAI INVESTMENT PARK 2 DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, ALSO AT NO. 2-94 HOSALA NAGARMUTT BARKUR POST, UDUPI-576 210 …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ORDER OR DIRECTION CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT MANGALORE IN IA NO. VIII UNDER SECTION Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 203 OF CR.P.C. DATED 09/11/2023 OF MC NO. 21/2023, VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the orders passed on IA.No.8 in Crl.M.C No.21/2023 dated 09.11.2023 by the Prl. Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangalore, whereby the family court has allowed the application and passed the following order. “I.A. No. VIII filed by the respondent, is hereby allowed. Office is hereby directed to return the petition to the next friend of the minor petitioner for presentation of the same before JMFC Court within whose jurisdiction the village Barkur is situated or the Family Court, Udupi, as this court lacks the jurisdiction” The child represented by mother is before this court. 2. Both the parties are referred to as wife and husband for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner/wife has filed this petition seeking maintenance on behalf of the child. Initially the petition is filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Bangalore Rural. Then the husband has raised the objection that the minor - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 petitioner is not residing at Bangalore and only with the intention to harass him, the petition was filed at Bangalore. Then the husband has filed Criminal Petition No.3459 of 2022 with a prayer to transfer the petition in Crl.Misc.No.489/2021 from the Chief Judicial Magistrate Rural Court, Bangalore to JMFC Court, Kundapur and the said petition came to be disposed off on 30.01.2023. The petition in Crl.Misc.No.489/ 2021 was withdrawn from the Chief Judicial Magistrate Rural Court, Bangalore and transferred the same to the Family Court, Mangalore for disposal in accordance with law. The coordinate bench of this Court by order dated 30.01.2023, had transferred the matter and in the order it is observed that the respondent/husband is the resident of Nagarmutt, Barkur Post, Udupi District. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the grandparents of the child who are the parents of the minor are residing at Mangalore. As the maternal grandparents are residing in Mangalore, if the maintenance petition is transferred to courts at Mangalore, it will be convenient for the petitioner who is residing at a distance of about 60 kilometers from Mangalore and also it would be convenient and the guardian can attend the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 maintenance case and accordingly, the Crl.Misc.No.489/2021 petition is withdrawn from the Chief Judicial Magistrate Rural Court, Bangalore and transferred to the Family Court at Mangalore. 4. Thereafter, the husband who has filed the transfer petition, filed an application i.e., IA No.8 under Section 203 of Cr.P.C for dismissal of the petition on the ground of jurisdiction. Then the Court by order impugned, allowed I.A.No.8 and directed to return the petition to the next friend of the minor for presentation of the same before the JMFC Court within whose jurisdiction the Barkur village is situated or the Family Court, Udupi as the courts at Mangalore lacks the jurisdiction. Then the learned judge of Family Court, Mangalore has observed that only on the ground that the High Court has transferred the petition, the family court cannot blindly entertain the same and pass orders on merits. Moreover, the High Court while disposing of the Crl.P.No.3459/2022 directed the trial court to dispose of the matter “in accordance with law” . The words used “in accordance with law” makes it clear that the Courts at Mangalore has to deal with the application in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 accordance with law and even find out whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the petition or not. It is needless to say that if the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition, then the court cannot dispose of the matter on merits. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/child submits that the trial court contrary to the orders of the High Court in the transfer petition has held that the court has no jurisdiction and the husband who has moved the court and who is the party before the court while the petition was transferred has again filed a petition and the same was entertained by the family court, Mangalore. It is submitted that the learned judge has passed the order contrary to the orders of the High Court in the Criminal Petition and the order needs to be set aside. 6. Though notice is served on the respondent, no vakalath is filed on behalf of the respondent. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the entire material on record. When the father has filed a petition before this court seeking transfer of the case, by exercising the powers under Section 407 of the Cr.P.C, the High - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 Court has transferred the case from the courts at Bangalore Rural to Mangalore. When once the case is transferred from Bangalore to Mangalore exercising the powers vested with the High Court, the learned Judge of family court ought not to have entertained the application, filed on the ground of jurisdiction that too an application filed by the father who is the party to the transfer petition. The interpretation of the learned Judge that when the court says “in accordance with law”, the family court also has to consider the jurisdiction issue also. Such a finding of the trial court is without appreciation of facts and law. If a particular case is filed before a court and the said court lacks jurisdiction,that is altogether a different aspect. When the High Court considering the facts of the case has passed an order transferring the case from one court to the other court, then the question of learned Judge deciding about the jurisdiction will not arise. The order that is passed by the learned Judge is contrary to law and contrary to the orders passed by this Court. The respondent who is a party to the transfer petition filed this application, having accepted the order passed in the transfer petition, it is nothing but a pure abuse of process of law. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32211 WP No. 23938 of 2024 8. In the light of above discussion, this court is passing the following: ORDER i. The orders passed on IA.No.8 inCrl.M.C No.21/2023 dated 09.11.2023 by the Prl. Judge, Family Court, D.K., Mangalore is set aside. ii. Accordingly, the writ petition is Allowed with costs of Rs.25,000/, payable by the respondent to the petitioner within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. iii. The Registrar (Judicial) shall send the copy of the order to Sri Abhay Dhanpal Chougala, District Judge. iv. All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56