- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42263 WP No. 23311 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 23311 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI VINOD N., S/O SRI R.NARAYAN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 67/1 YASHASSU NILAYA MANJUNATHANAGAR ITTAMADU HOSAKEREHALLI BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE BENGALURU- 560 085 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GURUNATH T.S., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT BANUSHREE B.J., D/O SRI G.N.JAYARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 2693, 11TH MAIN, D BLOCK 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU -560 010 …RESPONDENT THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE TRAIL COURT RECORDS OF EXECUTION PETITION NO.31/2024 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL CITY FAMILY COURT JUDGE AT BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42263 WP No. 23311 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed in Execution Petition No.31/2024 dated 09.09.2024 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the objections raised by the petitioner/Judgment Debtor to the main petition were overruled and the Family Court had held that the respondent/Decree Holder is entitled for the educational expenses of the child paid by her for the academic years 2022-23 and 2023-24 respectively in accordance with the receipts produced by her. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner before this Court is the husband/ Judgment Debtor. Both the parties had entered into a compromise in M.C.No.1539/2021 and they have filed a joint petition and as per the memorandum of settlement, the husband had agreed to bear full educational expenses until the child completes his education. The wife had agreed to keep him informed in advance about all fees as and when becomes due and payable so that the husband makes the payment on time, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42263 WP No. 23311 of 2025 either directly to the concerned authority or reimburse the same to the wife. Then the wife had filed Execution Case No.31/2024 for recovery of educational expenses of the child for the academic years 2022-23 and 2023-24. The husband had filed objections stating that the execution petition is not maintainable and the Decree Holder had not filed any supporting documents to show the educational and bus expenses and claiming at her whims and fancies and she had not intimated the Judgment Debtor before paying fees or before filing the execution petition and the husband had already paid the amount to the wife during the pendency of M.C. petition at her request. 4. The Family Court had considered the objections filed by the husband and had held that as per Clause 4 of the memorandum of settlement, the husband/Judgment Debtor is liable to pay the educational expenses. In support of her contentions, the wife had placed documents before the Family Court. The Family Court had observed that the bank statement is dated 15.05.2021 wherein an amount of Rs.4 lakhs is transferred to the wife. In the light of the memorandum of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42263 WP No. 23311 of 2025 settlement, M.C.No.1539/2021 was disposed of on 18.09.2021 and decree was signed on 22.09.2021 and there is no reference regarding adjustment of Rs.4 lakhs transferred to the account of the wife towards educational expenses. In the absence of such term in the memorandum of settlement which is a part of the decree, the Judgment Debtor cannot claim that during the pendency of M.C. petition, as per the request of the Decree Holder, he has paid Rs.4 lakhs towards educational expenses of the child. It is not the case of the Judgment Debtor that after passing of decree he has paid the educational expenses of the child. As the wife had already paid the amount, she had produced the receipts for having paid the amount. Accordingly, the objections filed by the husband were overruled and he was directed to pay the educational expenses of the child for the academic years 2022-23 and 2023-24. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the husband/Judgment Debtor has reiterated the grounds which are taken before the Family Court. It is submitted that the particular aspect of payment of Rs.4 lakhs was not part of the memorandum of settlement and as the wife insisted the husband that he should - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42263 WP No. 23311 of 2025 not inform anybody about the payment of the said amount, he had not informed anybody about the same and it is not part of the memorandum of settlement between the parties. It is submitted that the receipts that are filed cannot be considered as they are not original receipts. It is submitted that as the husband is continuously paying the amount and he had already paid the amount in the year 2021, the execution petition filed by the wife is not maintainable. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the entire material on record. The decree was signed on 22.09.2021. According to the husband, he has paid an amount of Rs.4 lakhs on 15.05.2021. The present execution petition is filed by the wife for the educational expenses of the child for the academic years 2022-23 and 2023-24. In that case, the submission that the amount that is paid in the year 2021 has to be considered even for these years cannot be accepted and the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner has no force. As per the judgment and decree, there is no mention about the amount paid earlier and that amount has to be adjusted to the further years. Whatever is the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42263 WP No. 23311 of 2025 understanding between the parties, it is not a part of the decree which is executable and it is not for this Court to consider the same. The Family Court had rightly considered all the objections that are raised on behalf of the husband and had rightly overruled the objections and this court finds no reasons to interfere. 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.: 4