- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28033 RPFC No. 187 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 187 OF 2021 BETWEEN: SRI. K. SHIVARAMU S/O LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS RANGE FOREST OFFICER, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, NOW TRANSFERRED TO KANAKAPURA WILD FOREST RANGE KANAKPURA-570 001. PREVIOUSLY RESIDING AT C/O SEETHARAM, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BEHIND SBM BANK, TAVAREKERE, BANGALORE-562 130. CORRECT ADDRESS: SHIVARAM K., RANGE FOREST OFFICER, BYLUR, WILDLIFE RANGE, BYLUR B.R.J., CHAMARAJANAGAR-571 313. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJU C.N., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. SMT. SHIVAMMA G.C. W/O K. SHIVARAM, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 2. PARINATHA S VAISHNAVI D/O K. SHIVARAM, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, 3. DEEPAK S ACHYUTH S/O K. SHIVARAM, Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28033 RPFC No. 187 of 2021 AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 ARE SINCE MINORS AND THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN THEIR MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1 SHIVAMMA. ALL ARE RESIDING AT GROUND FLOOR, C/O KEMPAIAH BUILDING, BEHIND MANJUNATHA FAST FOOD, KANGARI MAIN ROAD, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-570 011. …RESPONDENTS THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO (A) CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FMAILY COURT, BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC.NO.625/2017 DATED 17.12.2019 AND DISMISS THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The RPFC is of the year 2021. Till now, no steps are taken for issuance of notice to the respondents. 2. When the matter was listed on 18.7.2025, as there was no representation on behalf of both the parties and no notice is served on the respondents, the matter - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28033 RPFC No. 187 of 2021 was directed to be listed under the caption for 'dismissal' today. 3. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it appears that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the matter. 4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33