- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34539 CP No. 153 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA CIVIL PETITION NO. 153 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SMT. V. SARITHA @ V. ARATHI D/O LATE VENUGOPAL, W/O RAGHU V.S, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT D NO. 385/69, VENUGOPALA NILAYA, SHAKTHI NAGARA, 3RD STAGE, NEAR METRIC HOSTEL, DAVANAGERE - 577 003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA B. R, ADVOCATE) AND: RAGHU V.S. S/O SIDDAPPASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT VENKATIPETE VILLAGE, BICCODU HOBLI, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115 …RESPONDENT (VIDE ORDER DATED 08.07.2026, NOTICE IS HELD SUFICIENT) THIS CP IS FILED UNDER SEC.24 OF CPC., PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER, WITHDRAWING THE MATRIMONIAL CASE FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONBLE SENIOR Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34539 CP No. 153 of 2026 CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BELUR IN MC NO.23/2026 TITLED AS RAGHU V.S. V/S SMT. ARATHI V. AND ORDER TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE FAMILY COURT, AT DAVANAGERE FOR DISPOSAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that notice has been served on the learned counsel for the respondent. He has also produced the postal tracking record, which discloses that the notice was delivered on 06.07.2026 and has filed a memo to that effect. In spite of service of notice neither respondent nor his counsel turned up. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. This Civil Petition is filed by the petitioner/wife for transfer of M.C.No.23/2026, filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights from the Court of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Belur, to the Family Court at Davanagere. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34539 CP No. 153 of 2026 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is residing at Davanagere along with her parents and she has also filed M.C.No.496/2025 for divorce before the Family Court at Davanagere. It appears that the respondent has filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights nearly one year after the filing of the divorce. It is further stated that the distance between the two places is 180 kilometres. The petitioner has no independent source of income, whereas the respondent having a coffee estate and is financially well settled. In the circumstances, it would be difficult for the petitioner to travel all the way. 5. Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, in the absence of respondent's arguments and also considering the fact that the petition for restitution of conjugal rights as well as the divorce petition is to be decided by one Court, to avoid conflicting decisions. This Court finds that it is just and reasonable to transfer M.C.No.23/2026, filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights before the Court of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Belur, to the Family Court at Davanagere, to try along with M.C.No.496/2025, which has been filed by the petitioner for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34539 CP No. 153 of 2026 divorce. The Family court is specifically directed to club both the matters and to dispose of them so as to avoid conflicting judgments. Accordingly, the Civil Petition is allowed. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4