Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 75427 (KAR)

MRS. PRIYADARSHINI M v. MR. KEERTHAN P.K.

MFA/97/2021 · 2025-10-16

Jayant Banerji, K V Aravind

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41319-DB MFA No. 97 of 2021 C/W RPFC No. 41 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 97 OF 2021 (FC) C/W REV.PET FAMILY COURT No. 41 OF 2021 IN MFA No. 97/2021 BETWEEN: 1. MRS. PRIYADARSHINI M., AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, W/O SRI KEERTHAN P.K., DAUGHTER OF SRI. MOHANDAS KUMAR, R/AT SAI MAHAL, HOUSE No.1/11/1, KANAKARABETTU, NEAR SOOTERPETE RAILWAY CROSSING, MANGALORE 575002. …APPELLANT (BY SRI MOHIT U THODASKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI GIRIDHAR S. V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. KEERTHAN P.K., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. LATE P.K. VASANTH POOJARY, R/AT PADMA KEETHI, BHAVANTHI STREET, JODUMATA ROAD, NEAR RAGHAVENDRA TEMPLE, MANGALORE 575 001. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41319-DB MFA No. 97 of 2021 C/W RPFC No. 41 of 2021 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.02.2020 PASSED IN MC No.448/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, D.K, MANGALURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. IN RPFC No. 41/2021 BETWEEN: 1. MRS. PRIYADARSHINI M., AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, W/O SRI KEERTHAN P.K., DAUGHTER OF SRI. MOHANDAS KUMAR, R/AT SAI MAHAL, HOUSE No.1/11/1, KANAKARABETTU, NEAR SOOTERPETE, RAILWAY CROSSING, MANGALORE 575002. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MOHIT U THODASKAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI GIRIDHAR S. V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. KEERTHAN P.K., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. LATE P.K. VASANTH POOJARY, R/AT PADMA KEETHI, BHAVANTHI STREET, JODUMATA ROAD, NEAR RAGHAVENDRA TEMPLE, MANGALORE 575 001. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.02.2020 PASSED IN CRL.MISC. CASE No.68/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT D.K.MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION.S THIS MFA AND RPFC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDSER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41319-DB MFA No. 97 of 2021 C/W RPFC No. 41 of 2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) MFA No.97/2021 is filed seeking to set aside the judgment and decree dated 10.02.2020 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada,1in MC No.448/2017 insofar as the same relates to refusal to grant maintenance pendente lite and alimony to the appellant. The connected RPFC No.41/2021 is filed seeking to set aside the order dated 10.02.2020 passed by the Family Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.68/2017. 2. A memo has been filed today in Court, signed by the learned advocate for the appellant Sri. S.V. Giridhar, which reflects that all claims between the parties have been amicably settled and a prayer has been made that the present proceedings may be closed as settled out of Court. However, we find from the documents enclosed with this memo that they are not originals, but photocopies. 1 Family Court - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41319-DB MFA No. 97 of 2021 C/W RPFC No. 41 of 2021 3. At this stage, Sri. Mohit U Thodaskar, (Enrolment No.KAR/3343/2024) learned advocate, who is holding the brief of Sri S.V. Giridhar, learned advocate for the appellant, states that the certified copies of the documents are available with him and he has filed copies of the same along with the memo filed today, in the Court. These certified copies of documents are taken on record. 4. It appears that a joint memo has been filed by the parties in the Court of the Family Court. Following that, on 24.12.2021, the joint memo dated 24.12.2021 was accepted and the petition was disposed of in terms of the said joint memo. An award was directed to be drawn accordingly. 5. In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives in the two cases and they accordingly stand disposed of. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9