- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010079332024 NC: 2026:KHC:42958 RPFC No. 29 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 29 OF 2024 BETWEEN: S. RAMACHANDRA @ HEMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O LATE SUBRAMANYA, NOW RESIDING AT NO. 41/1C, 1ST MAIN, (WAS R/O. NO. 670, BINUYPETE NEW LAYOUT, BANGALORE- 560023) PALACE GUTTAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 003. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SAHANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GOPALA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT NEELA @ PUSHPA W/O S RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O 28/C, K T J NAGAR, 13th CROSS, NITTUVALLI MAIN ROAD, DAVANGERE. 2. KUM. SINCHANA R D/ RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS, STUDENT, SINCE MINOR Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010079332024 NC: 2026:KHC:42958 RPFC No. 29 of 2024 REPRESENTED THROUGH HER MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S. G. RAJENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2024. PASSED IN CRL.MISC NO.122/2020 ON THE FILE OF JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SE.125 OF CR.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner Sri.S.Ramachandra, respondent No.1 Smt.Neela and respondent No.2 Kum.Sinchana R., are present in person. Attempts for reconciliation failed. 2. Smt.Sahana representing Sri.Gopala learned counsel on record for the petitioner as well as Sri.Narayan representing Sri.S.G.Rajendra Reddy, learned counsel on record for the respondents are present. 3. Smt.Sahana, learned counsel who represents the petitioner states that though Family Court, Davanagere granted exorbitant sum to the respondents as - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010079332024 NC: 2026:KHC:42958 RPFC No. 29 of 2024 maintenance, yet, as petitioner has got abundant love and affection towards the respondents who are his wife and child, he intends to perform his obligation of maintaining them and therefore she was instructed by the petitioner to withdraw this revision petition. Seeks permission to withdraw the revision petition. 4. Having considered the submission thus made, permission as prayed for is accorded. Revision petition is thereby dismissed as withdrawn. 5. In the light of the disposal of the revision petition itself, proceedings on I.A.No.1/2025 are closed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70