- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52798-DB MFA No. 7323 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 7323 OF 2019 (MC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PRASANNA KUMARI, W/O SRINIVASA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT JANGAMANAKOTE, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 562102. …APPELLANT (BY SRI UDAY K. S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SRINIVASA, S/O LATE MUNISIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT PUTTAMMANAPALYA, KASABA HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI C. PATTABIRAMAN, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 28(1) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.08.2017, PASSED IN MC. No.101/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MADHUGIRI, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52798-DB MFA No. 7323 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 03.08.2017 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C at Madhugiri1 in M.C.No.101/2016. By means of the impugned judgment and decree, the petition filed by the husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19552, has been decreed. 3. The contention is that the appellant could not appear in the matrimonial case and therefore, the matter was heard ex-parte and was thereafter decreed. A request has been made for remand. 4. We have perused the impugned judgment and decree and find that the finding is of due service of notice and that the respondent-appellant herein had appeared before the trial Court through her counsel but chosen not to file 1 trial Court 2 HM Act - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52798-DB MFA No. 7323 of 2019 objections. We have also perused the reasons accorded by the trial Court in granting the decree for divorce. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant, after arguing for some time, states that the only reason for filing this appeal is that no permanent alimony has been granted by the trial Court. It is further stated that the parties are living separately for nearly a decade, and therefore, the appellant would be satisfied only with grant of alimony. 6. In case the alimony is sought by the appellant, it is for the appellant to move an application under Section 25 of the HM Act before the competent Court. 7. The appeal is accordingly dismissed in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the appellant. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17