- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 18317 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: MRS. ASHWINI W/O LATE. C.L. ANANTHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.1122, GROUND FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU - 570 023. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RUPESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. VIDHYA M.V. D/O LATE M.S.VIJAYASARATHY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.61, TELECOM LAYOUT, BOGADI 2ND STAGE, MYSURU - 570 026. 2. MR. SUJAY B.V. S/O MR. C.K. BADRINATH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.1114, 2ND CROSS, 2ND STAGE, SRIRAMPURA, MYSURU-570023 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.A.VIJAY., ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27.03.2025 PASSED ON IA NO. 4 FILED UNDER Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 ORDER 1 RULE 10 (2) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC BY THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT MYSORE IN M.C.NO.753/2024 AS PER ANNEXURE -A. THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 21.07.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CAV ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in M.C.No.753/2024 dated 27.03.2025 by the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru, whereby the Family Court had allowed I.A.No.4 filed by respondent No.1/wife under Order 1 Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC, the proposed party is before this Court. 2. The parties are referred to as husband, wife and proposed party for the sake of convenience. 3. Respondent No.1 herein i.e., the wife had filed M.C.No.753/2024 seeking divorce on the ground of adultery. In the petition, it is stated that the husband is having illicit relationship with several people. Thereafter, she has come up with I.A.No.4 seeking to implead the proposed party as respondent No.2. It is the case of the wife that the husband is - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 having adulterous relationship with the proposed respondent i.e., the petitioner herein and the husband and petitioner were caught red-handed by the wife when they were together. In fact, after the wife left the matrimonial home, the petitioner had started to live with her husband and helped conduct the Health Club activities. It is also stated that the wife had filed the petition seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and the petitioner is a proper and necessary party for the proper adjudication of the case. Thereafter, notice was issued to the proposed party. 4. The proposed respondent No.2 i.e., the petitioner herein had filed objection to the application filed by the wife and denied the entire averments that she is leading an adulterous life. It is stated that she is residing along with her aged mother and her daughter and she was married in the year 2009 and in the wedlock, a female child was born and subsequently her husband died due to ill health. After the death of her husband, she is the only earning member in the family and she has suffered lot of problems and also faced financial problems and she started catering business from her house. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 She is also suffering from various health problems and even her weight started increasing day by day and as per the advice of doctors, she has reduced her weight by joining the nutrition club. The wife is her neighbor residing along with her husband and her son. The petitoner is well known to the wife and husband as they are jointly running the nutrition club. As she joined the nutrition club and reduced her weight, the wife became jealous and she filed the application by making false allegation against the petitioner. It is stated that petitioner is neither a necessary party to this case nor she is a proper party. Only with an intention to lower the reputation of the petitioner in the eye of public, these kinds of allegations are made by the wife. 5. The Family Court by order impugned had allowed the application. While allowing the application, the Family Court had observed that the husband had filed separate matrimonial case against the wife in M.C.No.663/2024 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the wife had filed M.C.No.753/2024 seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty. When both the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 cases were clubbed together and when the case is set down for evidence, the wife has come up with the application. According to the petitioner, she has no illicit relationship with the husband of respondent No.1. The Family Court had observed that the burden is on the wife to prove her case. The wife had also stated that she is having documentary evidence with her to prove that the husband is leading adulterous life with the petitioner and she produced the photographs, video and audio recordings before the Family Court to substantiate her contention. Such being the case, for the proper and effective adjudication of the case, the petitioner/proposed respondent is a proper and necessary party and accordingly allowed the application. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/proposed party submits that the wife had filed the photographs where apart from the petitioner, there were several other women in those pictures. Why the application is filed impleading the petitioner itself shows that only to humiliate the petitioner and to lower her reputation, the present application is filed. It is submitted that the Family Court simply stating that certain - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 photographs and video recording are filed had allowed the application and there is no discussion about those photographs and what is the value of them at this stage. It is submitted that the Family Court ought not to have allowed the application filed by the wife. 7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/wife submits that the Family Court had rightly allowed the application and there are no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Family Court. 8. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. When a matrimonial case is filed seeking divorce on the ground of adultery, unless the adulteress is made a party, the said petition is not maintainable. Now, whether the petitioner is living in an adulterous relationship or not, the burden lies on respondent No.1/wife to prove the same. According to the petitioner, she is not having an illicit relationship with the husband. At this stage, the Family Court cannot dismiss the application and as rightly observed by the Family Court, the burden lies on the wife to prove her case and in the considered opinion of this Court, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39398 WP No. 18317 of 2025 there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Family Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1