MRS MARIA JULIET BARETTO v. MR RUDOLF MICHEAL D'SOUZA
MFA/6684/2015 · 2026-03-12
Jayant Banerji, Rajesh Rai K
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17517 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 17517 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14895-DB MFA No. 6684 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6684 OF 2015 (IDA)
BETWEEN:
MRS. MARIA JULIET BARETTO D/O LATE MICHEAL BARETTO AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT 'MAYADI HOUSE', MEREMAJAL POST, VIA FARANGIPET, BANTAWAL-574 187. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR. RUDOLF MICHEAL D'SOUZA S/O LATE PASCAL D'SOUZA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O MASTER MAHAL MEREMAJAL, NEAR OMZOOR CHURCH, BANTWAL-574 187. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VISHNUMURTHY, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14895-DB MFA No. 6684 of 2015
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 55 OF INDIAN DIVORCE ACT, 1869 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.1.2015 PASSED IN M.C NO.38/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, BANTWAL, D.K, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 10(vii)(x) OF DIVORCE ACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
When the matter was last listed on 19.02.2026, the following order was passed:
"1. Repeated adjournments were sought by the learned counsel for the appellant for filing of translated copies of documents. Thereafter on 11.12.2025, the learned counsel for the parties jointly requested that the matter be referred for
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14895-DB MFA No. 6684 of 2015
mediation. The matter was accordingly referred to mediation. Today, the learned counsel for the appellant states that the parties have not settled in mediation and seeks an adjournment.
2. The office report reflects that translated copies have been filed by
learned counsel for the appellant but the translated copies have not been attested.
3. Therefore, list the appeal on 12.03.2026 for dismissal.
4. It shall be open for the learned counsel for the appellant to attest the translated copies prior to the next date of listing."
2. Therefore, the case is listed for dismissal.
3.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that he may be permitted to attest the translated copies of the documents. It is evident that he has not complied with the
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14895-DB MFA No. 6684 of 2015
order of the Court. He further seeks a pass over which we are not inclined to grant.
4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
5. This order has been passed in the presence of the learned counsel for the respondent.
Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE
Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE
CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15