- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 1533 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: DR. SOUJANYA @ DR. SOUJANYA APPASAB WALKE, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.230, MARUTHI SAMVARDHINI NILAYA, 1ST FLOOR, 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, CAMBRIDGE LAYOUT, HALASURU, BENGALURU - 560 008 WORKING AS GOVERNMENT MEDICAL OFFICER, COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER IN HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, KIKERI HOBLI, K.R PET TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 423 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH H., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 AND: DR. RAKESH @ DR. RAKESH RAYALA, S/O DR. RAJSHEKAR RAYALA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 10, 4TH FLOOR, NEXT TO GANESH TEMPLE, C.M.C LAYOUT, CHIKKABALAPURA TOWN CHIKKABALAPURA DISTRICT - 562 101 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NAGARAJA N., ADVOCATE) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL FAMILY JUDGE, CHAIKABALLAPURA IN M.C.NO. 34/2023. THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 08.07.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 CAV ORDER The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner/wife aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in M.C.No.34/2023 dated 07.01.2025 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chikkaballapura, whereby the Family Court had permitted the respondent/husband to file his rejoinder in consequence to the statement of objections filed by the wife. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. The husband had filed M.C.No.34/2023 seeking divorce. In that, the wife had filed the statement of objections. Subsequent to filing of the objections, the husband had come up with an application under Section 10 of the Family Courts Act read with Section 151 of the CPC, seeking permission to file his rejoinder statement to main petition filed by him consequent to the statement of objections filed by the wife. On 04.01.2025, the Family Court observed that sufficient opportunity is given to the wife for filing her objections on I.A.No.4 and objections was taken as not filed. On 06.01.2025, the wife had filed the application under Section 151 of CPC - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 praying to recall the order dated 04.01.2024 and to file objections to application filed by the husband. The Family Court had heard the arguments of both sides and the case was posted for orders on 07.01.2025. On 07.01.2025, the Family Court had allowed the application filed by the husband to file his rejoinder to the objections filed by the wife. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the wife submits that the wife had filed the statement of objections to the main petition without there being any relief of counter claim against the husband. In the absence of any counter claim, the husband is not entitled to file any reply/rejoinder to the petition. It is submitted that Order 8 Rule 6-E (3) of CPC will come into play only when there is a relief of counter claim made by the wife. When it is not the scenario here, the Family Court ought not to have allowed the same. It is argued that the Family Court did not consider Section 10 of the Family Courts Act, where the provision of law speaks about the procedural law of CPC is applicable to proceedings before it. It is submitted that no provision of law under CPC provides liberty to the husband to make rejoinder to statement of objections without there being - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 any relief of counter claim. It is argued that unless and until there is a statutory provision enabling the husband to file the rejoinder to the statement of objections without counter claim, the Family Court ought not to have allowed the same. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the husband submits that the wife had filed her statement of objections to the main petition. It is submitted that the wife had indulged in character assassination and has also made false allegations against the husband and the family members thereby trying to lower their prestige and status in society. In order to dispel the false allegations and the aspersions created on the character of the husband’s parents' reputation, he is advised to file the rejoinder statement. It is submitted that if the application is not allowed, it would cause lot of hardship to the husband and no prejudice would be caused to the wife. That damage cannot be compensated in terms of money as it touches the character of the husband and his reputation in society. As such, filing of a rejoinder statement is very much necessary for proper adjudication of the case. It is submitted that the Family Court - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 had rightly allowed the application and there are no grounds to interfere. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. The Family Court by order impugned had observed that the wife had resisted the application filed by the husband by filing her objections. The Family Court had observed that granting of leave to the husband to file additional pleadings by way of reply/rejoinder to the contentions in the objection statement would prejudice none. A rejoinder allows a party to clarify facts, explain issues and respond to new facts. Accordingly, I.A.No.4 filed by the husband was allowed. 7. At this juncture, it is appropriate to look at Order 8 Rule 9 of CPC which reads as follows: “9. Subsequent pleadings.—No pleading subsequent to the written statement of a defendant other than by way of defence to set-off or counter-claim shall be presented except by the leave of the Court and upon such terms as the Court thinks fit; but the Court may at any time require a written statement or additional written statement from any of the parties and fix a time of not more than thirty days for presenting the same.” - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 8. In a normal sense, after filing of the petition, when objections/written statements are filed, when there is a counter claim, the husband can always file a rejoinder to that. But it does not mean that when there is no counter claim, there is specific bar under CPC against filing a rejoinder without a counter claim. The party always with the leave of the Court can file the rejoinder. Further, generally Family Court adopts a liberal approach to pleadings to advance justice. Petitioner/plaintiff is permitted to file a rejoinder and with the leave of the Court, they can file the rejoinder to clarify the allegations that are made by the other side. The husband is not introducing any new cause of action but the purpose of filing rejoinder is to deal with new facts introduced in the written statement/objection. It would not prejudice anybody and in this case, there are no delaying tactics on behalf of the husband. Considering all these facts, the Family Court had rightly allowed the I.A. filed by the husband seeking permission to file the rejoinder and this Court do not find any reasons to interfere. Hence, this Court is passing the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53397 WP No. 1533 of 2025 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